Epicurean Vs Stoicism

1854 Words 8 Pages
We all tend to be happy in our lives. Some people compare happiness with factors like money, social status etc. while some mean satisfaction by happiness. I personally feel that it is our desires that control our happiness and these desires if controlled can lead to positive feelings like satisfaction. It has been rightly said, “Satisfaction is the death of desire.” Out of the four accounts that we covered, I would select the views of the Epicurean and the Stoic accounts for the description of happiness. Both these accounts clearly signify the various pleasures and desires that one considers in order to attain happiness. The Epicurean and the Stoic accounts also relate to Fredrick’s case where Fredrick considers external factors and sacrifices …show more content…
Epicureanism tells freedom from stress and being at peace helps us in leading a good life which is one of the strengths of this theory. But on the other hand, I feel that epicureanism lays emphasis on focusing on necessary desires only. It clearly states that we should avoid having unnecessary desires lie fancy food, beauty etc. which according to me is wrong. I feel that when one becomes rich, he should definitely go for having luxuries in life. People like Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates etc. are not doubts some of the richest people in the world but also are living a satisfying and a happy life. In the text, where there is mentioned that Fredrick’s wife Claudia started doing charitable work as a volunteer, it can be inferred that she wanted to be happy by helping those in need. And helping, uplifting and motivating other is has always been considered a very satisfying and a peaceful experience. Had Fredrick given time to his family and socialized with his friends, he would have led a very happy …show more content…
The way the theory believes in terming rational life as happy and flourishing is really commendable. I also like the way that this theory tells that our actions can control the things that influence outside our control like physical pain, death, health etc. Had Fredrick given time to his family and taken care of his son and his wife when they were undergoing surgeries, pressure from his wife would have divided and the situation could have handled in a better way. It is clearly mentioned in the text that his wife always supported him and stood with him whenever he needed her. The weakness that I find in this theory is that it said that we can control the things outside our control. Taking an instance from the text of Fredrick, in the end, Fredrick died in a car accident. That was something that he was not aware of and had that accident would not have happened, he would probably have lived a happy life in the end and he might have attained happiness after he retired, as that was what he wanted. It is also mentioned that the things that are outside our control depends on chances and that was what happened with Fredrick. But on the other hand, it is also mentioned that we can influence things outside our control through our actions. I feel that both these statements are contradictory of each other as death came to Fredrick as a chance and he had no idea of it and it was because of luck that he

Related Documents