Pleasure and the Absence of Pain: Reading Epicurus' HedonismThrough Plato's Philebus Pubblico

Abstract

Abstract Pleasure and the Absence of Pain: Reading Epicurus' Hedonism Through Plato's Philebus By Kelly E. Arenson

Epicurus made a name for himself in the ancient world when he identified pleasure with the absence of pain and proceeded to distinguish it from a second, seemingly different variety of pleasure--that found `in motion' (kinetic). I interpret Epicurus' distinction through the lens of Plato's Philebus and the ancient debates concerning that dialogue. At issue in these debates and the theories that arise from them is whether pleasure is a process or an end and how pleasure ought to be conceived in terms of the harmonious functioning of a living organism. I argue that Plato identifies pleasure with the perceived process of restoration of an organism's natural harmony and that he uses this description to deny that pleasure is the good. Aristotle, rebuking the Platonic position, counters that pleasures are not processes of replenishment but are associated with the activity of an organism's unimpeded functioning. In the Epicurean development of these ideas, kinetic pleasure is the perceived restoration of the natural functioning of a living organism, and katastematic pleasure is painless, natural functioning itself, or health. On this reading, Epicurus considers any perceived affection that does not involve pain to be katastematic and thus the highest pleasure, including everyday sensory pleasures, such as taste. I show that Epicurus' distinction between pleasures serves as a dialectical response to the Philebus and bears the marks of Aristotle's response to the dialogue as well.

Table of Contents

ABBREVIATIONS

NOTES ON THE TEXT

INTRODUCTION...1

PART I. EPICURUS ON PLEASURE

I.1. Gosling, Taylor, and Nikolsky...20 I.2. Epicurean Pleasure: A New Reading...41

A. Katastematic Pleasure...43 B. Kinetic Pleasure...54 C. Nonrestorative Pleasures...65 D. Principal Doctrine 18...75 E. Diogenes Laertius 10.136...84

I.3. De Finibus 1 and 2...97

I.4. Conclusion...112

PART II. THE PHILEBUS AND THE FOURTH-CENTURY DEBATES

II.1. The Restoration Model in Plato's Philebus...116

A. The Restoration Model and the Perception Requirement: A General Account...118

B. Pleasure as a Filling: Republic Book 9...122 C. The Model and Mixed Pleasures...128 D. The Neutral State...145 E. Pure Pleasures...150 F. The 'Mixedness' of Mixed Pleasures...157 G. Closing Remarks...163

II.2. The Process Argument in Plato and Aristotle...165

II.3. Conclusion...193

CONCLUSION: EPICURUS' ETHICS AND THE PHILEBUS...196

BIBLIOGRAPHY...214

About this Dissertation

Rights statement

• Permission granted by the author to include this thesis or dissertation in this repository. All rights reserved by the author. Please contact the author for information regarding the reproduction and use of this thesis or dissertation.

School	Laney Graduate School
Department	Philosophy
Degree	PhD
Submission	Dissertation
Language	English
Research Field	Philosophy
Parola chiave	Plato Philebus Epicurus Pleasure Hedonism
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor	Strange, Steven K, Emory University
Committee Members	O'Keefe, Timothy, Georgia State University Patterson, Richard, Emory University Zupko, Jack, Emory University

Ultima modifica

Primary PDF

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Actions
	Pleasure and the Absence of Pain: Reading Epicurus' HedonismThrough Plato's Philebus ()	2018-08-28 12:50:54 -0400	Press to Select an action Download

Supplemental Files

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Actions