Beyond a good understanding of Epicurus’s philosphy Hossenfelder expresses his conviction that the Epicureay Way of living has a high topicality for all of us today. He sees Epicurus’s topicality in the 21^st century in five fields.

As his book on Epicurus  (Epikur,  Verlag C.H. Beck, 1998, München) is available only in German as far as I know, I will summarize here his recommendations.

1. The role of needs-based economy in producing happiness
2. The role of science in producing happiness
3. The role of autarky in producing happiness
4. The immediate and direct availability of happiness
5. The role of philosophy in forming ethical norms and defining a lifestyle

I will shortly present each of these domains in the next days.

You may get more information in German on Professor Hossenfelder here:

 http://www.uni-graz.at/malte.hossenfelder/site.php?show=1

 My own (mis-?)understandings and (mis-?)interpretations of the Epicurean texts differ from Cicero’s, Porphyrius’s and others’ (mis-?)understandings and (mis-?)interpretations

I agree with  almost all of Norman Wentworth DeWitt’s interpretations of the Epicurean texts (in his “Epicurus and His Philosophy”) and Martha Nussbaum’s interpretations of Epicurean psychological procedures (in her “The Therapy of Desire” ). In some specific issues I accept the pertinent interpretation of one or the other expert’s,  like Vincent Cook, Tim O’Keefe, D.S. Hutchinson, Victor Kioulaphides, Steven Ikier, Robert Hanrott, Tom Merle and some others.

For this reason I cannot speak of “Epicureanism” as such.

For me the Epicurean texts are less a raw material for interpretation or explanation than a source of inspiration and practical roadmap for a stress-FREE, truly happy life together with like-minded friends, using all the resources of modern science I have access to, especially pedagogy, psycho-sociology, organizational development and project management. I will go into details in my book “…live stress-FREE and happily ever after“.

 Epicurean texts and some of their interpretations – like e.g. Michel Foucault’s interpretation of Epicurean “parrhesia” ( a special form of giving feedback, see  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrhesia ), or Christoph Horn or Paul Rabbow’s or Pierre Hadot’s reconstructions and interpretations of Hellenistic philosophical exercises and practices, or the strong ecological interpretation of  Stephanie Mills’s  ”Epicurean Simplicity”  -serve as foundation and ingredients for my personal stress-FREEDOM guidance and are part of my reading of Epicurean stress-FREEDOM practice and stress-FREE lifestyle – as described in more detail in my  book under construction  “Epicurus reloaded”

For this reason it would be incorrect – and in my value scale: dishonest – to call my stress-FREEDOM guidance “Epicurean”. It is much more correct and modest to call it “mine”, i.e. “Galenian”, i.e. Galenios’s reading of Epicurus and of the world.