Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The epicurian statement

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Joey Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 06:14 PM
Original message
The epicurian statement
Saw this on Bart Cop.
=========
Subject: the epicurian statement
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
-Epicurius

Of course - the lack of faith in questioning the invisible sky god's existence
shows you have no faith and therefore are doomed.

Obviously God created evil - I wonder why?
Was it so the actors in his little Earth play could show some drama?

And why are the actors in God's play held accountable for
their actions if God knew all their sins before they were born?

Why has God killed millions of fetuses over the years?
What happened to the multi-million souls in Purgatory?
And if Purgatory never existed, why think Heaven exists?

If there is a God, he should reward those of us who used the brain
he gave us to avoid a lifetime of illogic, superstition and misery.

No matter which crazy religion one belongs to, 80% of
the world is dead-certain that you're completely wrong plus
they might kill you if you use a different book than they do.

It might be different if no religion was taught until you were
old enough to drive, drink and join the military.

It's all about geography.
If you were born in Saudi Arabia, you believe the crap your parents taught you.
If you were born in Iran, you believe the crap your parents taught you.
If you were born in India, you believe the crap your parents taught you.
If you were born in Oklahoma, you handle rattlesnakes.

I knew religion was fake by the second grade.
I kept catching the Nuns in logic traps until they finally said,
"Stop asking questions - you'll get all your answers in Heaven."

Yeah, right.

If you can't outwit a second grader
your story must have a lot of holes in it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. I like the cut of your jibe.
AND your jib.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skygazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. It's all god's will
We as mere mortals are not able to discern his divine will.

Yeah, circular logic that finally takes refuge in some version of "Because I said so." I was skeptical from a young age. The older I got, the less plausible it sounded. I see religion as people's attempts to explain the things around them they couldn't explain otherwise. Which is human nature. But don't call it Truth.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. That Epicurus quote is one of my favorites
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 06:40 PM by Odin2005
The Problem of Evil, AKA Epicurus's Paradox, is one of the things that lead me to Atheism. I cannot believe that a benevolent deity could let so much evil go on.

The Epicureans were an amazing bunch. They were often wrongly attacked as being vulgar hedonists when in reality they were the first distinct school of secular humanists, and Epicurus himself was an egalitarian who taught a form of the Golden Rule and openly let women and slaves into his school. There are many similarities with the more philosophical forms of Buddhism.

------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Epicurus is a key figure in the development of science and the scientific method because of his insistence that nothing should be believed except that which was tested through direct observation and logical deduction. Many of his ideas about nature and physics presaged important scientific concepts of our time. He was a key figure in the Axial Age, the period from 800 BCE to 200 BCE, during which similarly revolutionary thinking appeared in China, India, Iran, the Near East, and Ancient Greece. His statement of the Ethic of Reciprocity as the foundation of ethics is the earliest in Ancient Greece, and differs from the Stuart Mill's formulation by emphasizing the minimization of harm to oneself and others as the way to maximize happiness.

Epicurus's teachings represented a departure from the other major Greek thinkers of his period, and before, but was nevertheless founded on many of the same principles as Democritus. Like Democritus, he was an atomist, believing that the fundamental constituents of the world were indivisible little bits of matter (atoms, Greek atomos, indivisible) flying through empty space (khaos). Everything that occurs is the result of the atoms colliding, rebounding, and becoming entangled with one another, with no purpose or plan behind their motions. (Compare this with the modern study of particle physics.) His theory differs from the earlier atomism of Democritus because he admits that atoms do not always follow straight lines but their direction of motion may occasionally exhibit a 'swerve' (clinamen). This allowed him to avoid the determinism implicit in the earlier atomism and to affirm free will.<6> (Compare this with the modern theory of quantum physics, which postulates a non-deterministic random motion of fundamental particles.)

He regularly admitted women and slaves into his school, introducing the new concept of fundamental human egalitarianism into Greek thought, and was one of the first Greeks to break from the god-fearing and god-worshiping tradition common at the time, even while affirming that religious activities are useful as a way to contemplate the gods and to use them as an example of the pleasant life. Epicurus participated in the activities of traditional Greek religion, but taught that one should avoid holding false opinions about the gods. The gods are immortal and blessed and men who ascribe any additional qualities that are alien to immortality and blessedness are, according to Epicurus, impious. The gods do not punish the bad and reward the good as the common man believes. The opinion of the crowd is, Epicurus claims, that the gods "send great evils to the wicked and great blessings to the righteous who model themselves after the gods," when in reality Epicurus believes the gods do not concern themselves at all with human beings.

Epicurus' philosophy is based on the theory that all good and bad derive from the sensations of pleasure and pain. What is good is what is pleasurable, and what is bad is what is painful. Pleasure and pain were ultimately, for Epicurus, the basis for the moral distinction between good and bad. If pain is chosen over pleasure in some cases it is only because it leads to a greater pleasure. Although Epicurus has been commonly misunderstood to advocate the rampant pursuit of pleasure, (primarily through the influence of Christian polemics) what he was really after was the absence of pain (both physical and mental, i.e., suffering) - a state of satiation and tranquility that was free of the fear of death and the retribution of the gods. When we do not suffer pain, we are no longer in need of pleasure, and we enter a state of 'perfect mental peace' (ataraxia).

Epicurus explicitly warned against overindulgence because it often leads to pain. For instance, in what might be described as a "hangover" theory, Epicurus warned against pursuing love too ardently. However, having a circle of friends you can trust is one of the most important means for securing a tranquil life.

Epicurus also believed (contra Aristotle) that death was not to be feared. When a man dies, he does not feel the pain of death because he no longer is and he therefore feels nothing. Therefore, as Epicurus famously said, "death is nothing to us." When we exist death is not, and when death exists we are not. All sensation and consciousness ends with death and therefore in death there is neither pleasure nor pain. The fear of death arises from the false belief that in death there is awareness.

In connection with this argument, Epicurus formulated a version of the problem of evil. Though often referred to as the "Epicurean paradox," the argument is more accurately described as a reductio ad absurdum of the notion that an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent god could exist in a world that manifestly contains evil.<7> This doctrine, however, is not aimed at promoting atheism. Instead, it is part of an overarching philosophy meant to convince us that what gods there may be do not concern themselves with us, and thus would not seek to punish us either in this or any other life.<8>

Epicurus emphasized the senses in his epistemology, and his Principle of Multiple Explanations ("if several theories are consistent with the observed data, retain them all") is an early contribution to the philosophy of science.

"There are also some things for which it is not enough to state a single cause, but several, of which one, however, is the case. Just as if you were to see the lifeless corpse of a man lying far away, it would be fitting to list all the causes of death in order to make sure that the single cause of this death may be stated. For you would not be able to establish conclusively that he died by the sword or of cold or of illness or perhaps by poison, but we know that there is something of this kind that happened to him.<9>"

In contrast to the Stoics, Epicureans showed little interest in participating in the politics of the day, since doing so leads to trouble. He instead advocated seclusion. His garden can be compared to present-day communes. This principle is epitomized by the phrase lathe biōsas λάθε βιώσας (Plutarchus De latenter vivendo 1128c; Flavius Philostratus Vita Apollonii 8.28.12), meaning "live secretly", "get through life without drawing attention to yourself", i. e. live without pursuing glory or wealth or power, but anonymously, enjoying little things like food, the company of friends, etc.

As an ethical guideline, Epicurus emphasized minimizing harm and maximizing happiness of oneself and others:

"It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and well and justly (agreeing "neither to harm nor be harmed"<10>), and it is impossible to live wisely and well and justly without living a pleasant life.<11>"
------------------------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joey Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Thanks for that info, Odin2005 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC