(6) Physics. — Epicurus relied on the senses alone as the true basis of knowledge, and they reveal only matter in motion. Consequently, matter is the only reality. The incorporeal is the same as the non-existent, i.e. void, and this applies even to mind. When Epicurus explains the nature of matter, the inthionce of Democritus is at once evident. The immediate impression of the senses suggests large masses of matter, but this is not reliable. In reality the apparent masses are com- posed of extremely minute, invisible particles or atoms which ditter only in weight, size, and siiape, and, thougli near to each other, do not touch. Around each is a void. By analogy he argues that this is true not only of the nearer world but also of that wliich is most distant. He reaches this ex- planation by the elimination of all other possible theories. Atoms then being presumed, in what way do they move? Aristotle had taught that celestial bodies move in a circular manner, and fire upwards. But Epicurus claimed that the only movement of which we are aware is that of the fall of bodies to the earth — downward movement. All atomic movement then is eternally straight
downward. But this brings us to the conception of relative stagnation, as every body is moving in the same direction and at the same rate. To avoid this difficulty, Epicurus fell back upon our in- dividual experience of power to resist forces and cause them to deviate from their original direction. He then claimed for atoms something of the same power. How, where, and when this strange power operates we are not informed ; but, by assuming it, Epicurus arrives at an explanation of those vast aggregates of apparently concrete combina- tions of which our senses are conscious. The only ditt'erence between mind and matter is that the former is composed of minuter and rounder particles which pervade the body like a Avarm breath. To explain our consciousness of taste, colour, sound, etc., Epicurus resorts to a curious theory. In addition to the primary particles which each body possesses, there are secondary particles which vary in each case. These ' thin, filmy images, exactly copying the solid body whence they emanate,' are continually floating away from it ; and when they reach the various human organs, they produce with- in the mind the sensations of which we are conscious. This theory also accounts not only for our visions of the ghosts of departed friends, whose secondary particles may float about long after their death, but also for our perceptions of the gods ; for, though they are composed of much finer particles than mortals, their ' films ' may fall with impact upon the human organism.
Though charged with atheism, Epicurus never questioned the existence of the gods, though he taught their remoteness from, and indiH'erence to, human concerns. He ridiculed ancient mythology, whose ettect on men had been wholly injui-ious, and explained such portents as eclipses, thunder, etc., on purely natural grounds. He likewise denounced the belief in fate — a belief he con- sidered even more hurtful than the belief in Divine intervention. His teaching being frankly material- istic, Epicurus naturally disbelieved in immortality. For these reasons, he argued, man need have no fear : the gods do not concern themselves with him ; there is no such thing as fate ; and death is nothing but the end of all.
(c) Ethics. — Passing by the idealism of Plato and Aristotle, Epicurus had recourse to the doctrine of Aristippus of Gyrene, who taught that ' pleasure ' is the supreme good and ' pain ' the sole evil. Socrates, while admitting the importance of pleasure, regarded the pleasures of the mind as greater than those of the body. Aristippus pre- ferred the latter because of their greater intensity. His ideal was the intensest pleasure of the passing moment, entirely undisturbed by reason, its greatest foe ; not merely the absence of pain, but pleasure that was active and positive. The difficulty he found in attaining this ideal led him to allow some value to prudence as an aid thereto.
Epicurus dittered from Aristippus in the follow- ing respects : men should consider less the fleeting pleasure of the moment and aim at that of the wiiole life ; intense, throbbing ecstasy is less desir- able than a tranquil state of mind which may become perpetual ; indeed, at times, the highest possible pleasure may be merely the removal of pain ; tlie pleasures and pains of mind are more important than those of body, because of tlie joy or distress wliich may be accumulated by memory and anticipation. Much greater emphasis is like- wise laid on the virtue of prudence, which he calls ' a more precious tiling even than philosophy.* Prudence is in fact tlie chief virtue of all. By its means rival pleasures are judged ; and even momentary pain may be chosen, that a tranquil life may be furthered.
Epicureanism does not indulge in high moral
EPIMENIDES
ERASTUS
35^
ideals or insist upon any code of duties, whether public or private, save as these may minister to one's own pleasure, but neither does it inculcate {in theory) low, sensual delights. These have their l^lace, but what that place is must be decided by prudence, with a view to securing a complete life of tranquil pleasure. Epicurus is to be regarded as the founder of Hedonism.