BR shows deep understanding of Epicuranism and Epicurus as a philosopher in his “History of Western Philosophy”.
Yet in “The Conquest of Happiness” – a wonderful litlle book of Epicurean inspiration – he ignores Epicurus almost totally. (He does NOT disparage him, though, as Epicurus did Nausiphanes.)
Does anybody have a clue why the basically Epicurean Russell ignored Epicurus in this work?
Bertrand Russell shows deep understanding of Epicuranism and Epicurus as a philosopher in his “History of Western Philosophy”.
Yet in “The Conquest of Happiness” – a wonderful litlle book of Epicurean inspiration – he ignores Epicurus almost totally. (He does NOT disparage him, though, as Epicurus did Nausiphanes.)
Does anybody have a clue why the basically Epicurean Russell ignored Epicurus in this work?
This is the question I have just ported on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=14290&uid=86711477873#!/topic.php?uid=86711477873&topic=14290
Unwittingly Epicurean
My hypothesis is that people are born as Epicureans but then they are re-educated. So we are all of us unwittingly Epicureans – basicaslly.
But there is a group of people who know exactly who Epicurus was or Epicureanism was and is, and yet they either somehow “forget” to mention this like Bertrand Russell in “The Conquest of Happiness “
And then there are those who misunderstand and or misrepresent the essence of Epicureanism, but their work is another scientific support of Epicureanism, like Daniel Gilbert’s “Stumbling on Happiness”.
My hypothesis is that people are born as Epicureans but then they are re-educated. So we are all of us unwittingly Epicureans – basically.
But there is are people who know exactly who Epicurus was or Epicureanism was and is, and yet they somehow “forget” to mention this like Bertrand Russell in “The Conquest of Happiness “
And then there are those who misunderstand and or misrepresent the essence of Epicureanism, but their work is another scientific support of Epicureanism, like Daniel Gilbert’s “Stumbling on Happiness”.
I will call all them all simply “unwittingly Epicurean” and will go on scrolling their names with my claims.
“The best of life is but intoxication.” (Byron)
In my younger days it was vodka, whiskey, wine, sex, romantic love, theater, movies, literature, philosophy I got intoxicated with. Nowadays it’s mostly just literature and philosophy. Luckily I take up ideas slowly and forget them fast (some of my friends suggest that this could possibly be a retarded effect of all the alcohol I got intoxicated with in my younger days), so I can re-read pages again and again on human bondage and liberation by Epicurus, Michel Montaigne, Voltaire, Esther Vilar, Bertrand Russell, Kurt Vonnegut, Manfred Max-Neef and about a dozen of other authors experiencing every time almost the same thrill I felt when I first read them. Is this an anticipation of the beatitudes promised by Alzheimer ‘s?
Tags: alcohol, Alzheimer ‘s, Bertrand Russell, bondage, Byron, Epicurus, Esther Vilar, intoxication, Kurt Vonnegut, liberation, literature, Manfred Max-Neef, Michel Montaigne, movies, philosophy, romantic love, sex, theater, Voltaire
