I think I can say, though somewhat tentatively at this point, and with some reservations and caveats, that if I had to choose a philosophical school I would subcribe to, it would be Epicureanism. From my somewhat limited understanding of this philosophy, and clearly I need to delve into it further, it appears to be far more appealing than any philosophy I have been exposed to up to this point in my life. To be honest, I don’t think I can claim to be a Catholic, or even a Christian anymore.  At the very least, I think I am more of an Epicurean than a Christian. This is big for me. Irish Catholic born and raised, it is very hard to be turn my back in the Faith of My Fathers. But the reality is that I don’t believe in any of it any more. It is like a chasm has opened between what I accepted, without true belief, and what I accept now. I certainly need to ruminate more on this.

Let’s recount the tenets of Epicurean thought as expounded in the book by Greenblat called The Swerve, examining each for how prescient they were, and what we now know about each.

Atomism: Everything is made of invisible particles. We now know this to be scientifically supported, as much as anything in science can be. It is not just as a philosophical proposal, but has been repeatedly confirmed via scientific exploration and experimentation. We are all made of atoms.

The elementary particles of matter – the seeds of the things — are eternal.
For all intents and purposes this proposition is true as well. Perhaps it won’t be true in the very long term timeframe of the universe, both in past and far distant future, but this one, on our timescale, has also been shown to be true. We also know how these particles are created via nucleosynthesis within the cores of stars.

The elementary particles are infinite in number, but limited in shape and size.
While perhaps not infinite in an absolute sense, they are essentially infinite in so far as we are concerned and they are limited in shape and size, though there are 92 naturally occuring types. I am equating elementary particle here with atoms.

All particles are in motion in an infinite void. This is accepted via scientific inquiry. All matter is in motion. The only point in which they stop motion is at absolute zero, a temperature we cannot achieve with current technology, though we have come close. The infinite void is well, perhaps not infinite, but again with our limited ability to go beyond and travel billions of light years away, we essentially live in an infinite universe which is mostly void. Beyond our light horizon is essentially void and truly we don’t know what may exist beyond it, if anything. Given the estimate of a 90 billion light year diameter to the universe, this is one tenet we can accept.

The universe has no creator or designer.  Increasingly this appears to be true, but of course absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so I am not sure this can be stated with absolutely scientific assuredness.

Everything comes into being as a result of a swerve. I am unclear about what this one means. I need more information on what this means.

Nature ceaselessly experiments. Confirmed again via scientific study. We see this in evolution by natural selection for sure, and has been proven repeatedly. Fossil record and the tremendous biodiversity we see on earth is testament to this.

The universe was not created for or about humans. I think a truism here too. The sheer size and nature of the Cosmos I think precludes that it is here for us and us alone. It would be the height of hubris for us to think otherwise. One hundred billion galaxies, with about 100 billion stars in each, strewn across 90 billion light year diameter of the universe does seem like overkill.

There is no afterlife. One that also cannot be proven or disproven, though the balance of evidence suggests there is no afterlife. Or perhaps it is so good that no one ever wants to come back.

Death is nothing to us. This is the one I am not sure I agree with. I am certainly somewhat fearful of death. I don’t know what it wil bring. Perhaps something beyond. Perhaps nothingness. I don’t recall when I was nothing before, so I assume I won’t in the future either. I was nothing for a long long time. Is this something to fear then? This is definintely an area for further reflection and thought.

All organized religions are superstitious delusions. I can agree with this, though once again there is no empirical evidence to refute any religion absolutely. But it should be noted there is no evidence to support any either. The religions I have studied and understand seems to somewhat nonsensical the more one thinks about them.

Religions are invariably cruel. This is true very often, unfortunately. Too often given what religions actually profess to be about. The inherent chauvinism of most faiths, my birth faith included, make it easy to be used as a tool of oppression. My faith has had a brutal history of this, not to mention the current situation with sex abuse in the Church.

There are no angels, demons, or ghosts.  None have been scientifically proven to exist despite abundant efforts to do so. I think can be take as true.

The greatest obstacle to pleasure is not pain; it is delusion. Interesting how Buddhist this tenet appears, not that I subscribe to Buddhist religious and philosophical thought.

Understanding the nature of things generates deep wonder. Absolutely true. It seems to further my wonder the MORE I know. Ironically, it also makes me realise how little I do know.

The highest goal of human life is the enhancement of pleasure and the reduction of pain.  This is the one I am not sure I completely agree with. While I accept the reduction of pain as a laudable goal, I am not sure I agree that human life is about the enhancement of pleasure. One person’s pleasure may end up in someone else’s pain. No doubt there are numerous examples of that throughout history. Perhaps they do need to be seen in conjunction with each other — and one cannot have one without ensuring the second? In that case I could agree with this tenet.

It should also be noted that this is not a replacement faith for one I have ‘lost’, so I don’t have to accept all precepts wholesale. It is interesting, however, to see how well these precepts fit into a scientific naturalism as detailed by Sean Caroll in his book The Big Picture. But that is for another post.

Post script: I recently came across a newly published book by a philosopher Catherine Wilson How to be an Epicurean, subtitled The Ancient Art of Living Well (2019). I think a follow up post to this one will be in the works shortly.

Categories: Natural History, Ponderings