Epicurus (Philosophy)

Cicero criticizes Epicurus for writing a will and thus acting inconsistently with one of the basic tenets of his theory, namely that death is not an evil (De Finibus 2.101; De Natura Deorum 1.86). This analysis defends Epicurus' decision on the grounds that the performative nature of will writing allows the agent to experience personal pleasure by conferring a benefit to a friend and thus promoting the bonds of friendship.

ART OF LIVING: Pierre Hadot and Michel Foucault promoted the idea that ancient philosophy is essentially an art of living. In particular, this thesis is usually applied to the big philosophical schools deriving from the Hellenistic period. Epicurus, most notably, is often read as a philosopher who only aims at the improvement of one's individual life.
In this article I articulate my doubts about this one-sided reading of ancient philosophy in general and Epicurus in particular.

„Lebenskunst und Naturforschung bei Epikur”, in: Gerhard Ernst (Hg.), Philosophie als Lebenskunst, Berlin: Suhrkamp 2016, 33-65.

Introductory summary quote

This article was first published in the magazine «Ο Κήπος του Επίκουρου» ("The Garden of Epicurus") in September 2014.

Some of the main points are:

The presentation of the view of Epicurus (as expressed in the Επιστολή προς Ηρόδοτον, (Letter to Herodotus (Diogenes Laertios 47)), concerning the images and the transmitters of images and light, the κουφότατες ατόμους which now a days are called photons. This view is equivalent to the modern physical interpretation for light and its speed, which is the cornerstone of the Special Theory of Relativity.

Also of importance, is the negotiation of the differences between the Epicurean and the Democritean natural philosophy. There are two main differences: on one hand, the question of randomness or causality and on the other, the question of the number of different types of particles (ατόμων).
Epicurus, unlike Democritus, admits that there is a finite number of types of particles. The author of the article beyond quoting the justification given by Epicurus himself in the subject, gives his own justification supported by Bolzano-Weirstrass theorem and the equivalent Heine-Borel’s lemma.

A third point of interest that could be mentioned, is the phenomenon of “Brown’s Movement” described by Lucretius, exactly as described in modern physics textbooks.

Another point of interest is Epicurus view that bodies within vacuum, fall with the same speed, a view expressed 19 centuries before Galileo.

The article consists of excerpts of a broader study of the author in Epicurus physical theory.

The most original and shocking interpretation of Lucretius in the last 40 years.

Thomas Nail argues convincingly and systematically that Lucretius was not an atomist, but a thinker of kinetic flux. In doing so, he completely overthrows the interpretive foundations of modern scientific materialism, whose philosophical origins lie in the atomic reading of Lucretius' immensely influential book De Rerum Natura.

This means that Lucretius was not the revolutionary harbinger of modern science as Greenblatt and others have argued; he was its greatest victim. Nail re-reads De Rerum Natura to offer us a new Lucretius--a Lucretius for today.

(EN) This particular bachelor paper was written when I did my Erasmus and is a short analysis of the paragraphs of his letter. Let's keep in mind Epicurus's words: "Don't fear God,Don't worry about death;What is good is easy to get,What is terrible is easy to try"

(GR)Η συγκεκριμένη προπτυχιακή εργασία πραγματοποιήθηκε στα πλαίσια του Erasmus προγράμματος και αποτελεί μια σύντομη ανάλυση των παραγράφων της επιστολής. Ας κρατήσουμε στο μυαλό μας τα λόγια του Επίκουρου: " Ἄφοβον ὁ θεός, ἀνύποπτον ὁ θάνατος καὶ τἀγαθὸν μὲν εὔκτητον, τὸ δὲ δεινὸν εὐεκκαρτέρητο"

*I would like to apologise for my mistakes in English.
*Θα 'θελα να ζητήσω συγγνώμη για τα  λάθη μου στα Αγγλικά.

Μόνον μια χιλιετία περίπου μετά από την καταστροφή των επικούρειων γραπτών και μνημείων, έγινε δυνατό να ανασυγκροτηθεί η σκέψη του Επίκουρου κυρίως μέσα από δύο μεγάλα γεγονότα. Το πρώτο ήταν η εύρεση το 1417 του επικούρειου φιλοσοφικού ποιήματος των 7.415 στίχων στα λατινικά με τίτλο “Για τη φύση των πραγμάτων” του Ρωμαίου Λουκρήτιου, που χρονολογείται τον 1ο αιώνα π.χ.χ. Το δεύτερο γεγονός ήταν η πρώτη πλήρης εκτύπωση το 1533 της συλλογής για τους βίους των μεγάλων φιλοσόφων της αρχαιότητας με τίτλο “Βίοι καὶ γνῶμαι τῶν ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ εὐδοκιμησάντων” που συνέγραψε τον 3ο αιώνα μ.χ.χ. ο Διογένης Λαέρτιος, ο οποίος στο 10ο και τελευταίο βιβλίο του έργου αναφέρεται στον Βίο του Επίκουρου.
Στην παρούσα εργασία θα ασχοληθούμε με το έργο του Διογένη Λαέρτιου που αποτελεί κύρια πηγή για την επικούρεια φιλοσοφία και αναντικατάστατη, διότι περιέχει κείμενα του ίδιου του Επίκουρου.

A tradução aqui disponibilizada de Diógenes Laércio, livro X: Epicuro é antecedida de algumas observações sumárias. Trata-se da vida do filósofo grego da antiguidade, Epicuro, que dá nome à filosofia epicurista. Culmina desta forma a versão disponível na atualidade do projeto delineado por Diógenes Laércio (séc. III?) para abordar a vida de alguns eminentes filósofos. Abordam-se vários assuntos, como fontes, estilo e estrutura do livro. Assim, questões de foro biográfico do Filósofo do Jardim, carácter, amigos, detratores, afetos/ relacionamentos amorosos, obra, alusão à sua vertente doutrinária, testamento. De igual modo, aspetos relacionados com Epicuro, face ao estoicismo e ao atomismo.

Dans le langage ordinaire, l'épicurien est communément défini comme celui qui jouit d'une vie de plaisirs, sans entraves, dans l'excès de la bonne chère et du bon vin. Pourtant, quiconque a parcouru les oeuvres d'Épicure sait combien cet épicurien-là est éloigné de l'enseignement du maître dont il tire son nom. Il suffit, en effet, de lire la Lettre à Ménécée pour se convaincre que le philosophe du Jardin enseignait la modération et défendait comme idéal ascétique une vie plutôt frugale. Il serait donc tentant de considérer que cette figure de l'épicurien, la plus répandue encore aujourd'hui, se fonde sur un certain nombre de légendes qui ne résultent pas tant d'une critique philosophique que de témoignages, concernant la vie et les moeurs d'Épicure, dont les plus célèbres nous sont rapportés par Diogène Laërce dans le livre X des Vies, doctrines et sentences des philosophes illustres:

1 Dieser Text erschien erstmals als Kap. 3 meiner Geschichte der Ethik: Antike, München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag 1997. Auf die Wiedergabe griechischer Zitate wurde hier um der besseren Lesbarkeit willen verzichtet. Die fettgedruckten Zahlen im Text bezeichnen die Seitenangaben der ursprünglichen Ausgabe und sind da, um im Bedarfsfall die Zitierung zu erleichtern.

Βιβλίο καθηγητή. Περιλαμβάνονται:
• συνοπτικές αναφορές στη φιλοσοφική διδασκαλία των συγγραφέων που ανθολογούνται στον Φάκελο Υλικού, πρωτίστως του Πλάτωνα και του Αριστοτέλη, αλλά και του Επίκουρου, των Στωικών και άλλων
• ένταξη του αποσπάσματος στα ευρύτερα συμφραζόμενα του  φιλοσοφικού έργου στο οποίο ανήκει
• διδακτικά βήματα που δίνουν ιδέες για μια οργανωμένη πορεία διδασκαλίας μέσα στην τάξη
• ερμηνευτικά σχόλια, ειδικά και γενικά, που διευκρινίζουν τους τεχνικούς όρους που χρησιμοποιεί ο εκάστοτε φιλόσοφος και συμβάλλουν στην εμβάθυνση στις φιλοσοφικές του θέσεις
• γλωσσικά-ερμηνευτικά σχόλια που συνδέουν τη φιλοσοφική διδασκαλία, το περιεχόμενο του λόγου, με τις γλωσσικές επιλογές (λεκτικές, συντακτικές και υφολογικές) του συγγραφέα
• επιλεγμένα παραθέματα προερχόμενα από δόκιμες μελέτες και ακριβώς επικεντρωμένα στο υπό μελέτη θέμα
• ερμηνευτική ανάλυση ορισμένων από τα Παράλληλα Κείμενα και σύνδεσή τους με τα αντίστοιχα Κείμενα Αναφοράς
• προτεινόμενα Παράλληλα Κείμενα (πέραν αυτών που περιλαμβάνει ο Φάκελος Υλικού), συνοδευμένα από ενδεικτικές ερωτήσεις.

Lucretius was the first philosopher of immanence. It is he and not Democritus or Epicurus who holds this title. If we want to understand the historical emergence of the concept of immanence, we should start by distinguishing its precursors in Greek atomism from its first complete incarnation in Lucretius. This way, we can see exactly what first defined and distinguished immanence from its past. Therefore in what follows I would like to make three, perhaps controversial, claims about the emergence of philosophical immanence. 1) Lucretius was not an atomist, 2) Greek atomism reintroduced transcendence, and 3) It is the primacy of motion in Lucretius that defines his philosophical immanence. Lucretius was not an atomist This thesis is as counterintuitive as it is straightforward. The first major difference between Lucretius and the earlier Greek atomists is precisely that—the atom. For Leucippus, Democritus, and Epicurus atoms are always in motion, but the atom itself remained fundamentally unchanged, indivisible, and thus internally static—even as it moved. Thus instead of positing discrete atoms as ontologically primary as both ancient Greek and later modern theories do, one of Lucretius's greatest novelties was to posit the movement or flow of matter as primary. Lucretius did not simply " translate Epicurus, " as the Greco-centric story goes; rather, he introduced the first immanent kinetic materialism in the West. For example, although the Latin word atomus (smallest particle) was available to Lucretius to use in his poem, he intentionally did not use it, nor did he use the Latin word particula or particle to describe matter. The English translations of " atom, " " particle, " and others have all been added to the text in translation based on a certain historical interpretation of it. The idea that Lucretius subscribed to a world of discrete particles called atoms is therefore both a projection of Epicureanism, who used the Greek word atomos, and a retroaction of modern scientific mechanism of the fifteenth century onto De Rerum Natura. Lucretius rejected entirely the notion that things emerged from discrete particles. To believe otherwise is to distort the original meanings of the Latin text as well as the absolutely enormous poetic apparatus he summoned to describe the flowing, swirling, folding, and weaving of the flux of matter. Although Lucretius rejected the term atomus, he remained absolutely true to one aspect of the original Greek meaning of the word, τομος (átomos, " indivisible "), from-(a-, " not ") + τέμνω (témnō, " I cut "). Being is not cut up into discrete particles, but is composed of continuous flows, folds, and weaves. Discrete " things " (rerum) are composed of corporeal flows (corpora) that move together (conflux) and fold over themselves (nexus) in a woven knot work (contextum). For Lucretius, things only emerge and have their being within and immanent to the flow and flux of matter in motion. Discreteness is an apparent product of continuous folded matter, uncut, undivided, and in motion and not the other way around.

Gianmo Leopardi, Carlo Antici, Monaldo Leopardi, Adelaide Antici, Sebastiano Timpanaro jr., Sebastiano Timpanaro sr., Maria Cardini Timpanaro, la scienza greca, la filologia di e su Giacomo Leopardi, Epicuro, Lucrezio, il materialismo, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trockij, Pietro Citati.

Epicureans have been branded atheists since antiquity, but although they might have held unorthodox beliefs about divinity, they did nevertheless believe in gods, however unorthodox their beliefs about them were. They did not believe in the Olympians that Hesiod and Homer had depicted, but anthropomorphic yet bizarre gods: although these were compounds of atoms, they were immortal, unlike any other compound in the Epicurean universe, and there was quite possibly an infinite host of such deities, all alike and all nameless. These gods were not considered figments of the imagination by the Epicureans, but as real, living entities that actually existed, remotely, somewhere out there in the cosmos, doing very little aside from maintaining their supremely peaceful, painless, and tranquil dispositions. And these gods needed to be considered real in order to be genuine, ethical models for mankind to follow, which was their main function within the Epicurean world-view. The atoms of these gods, like everything in existence, were held to be perpetually in motion, constantly being emitted from their bodies as images that then travelled directly to the minds of mankind and thereby presented a true depiction of divinity, of peacefulness, and above all, of happiness, which would then be examples for individual Epicureans to follow on their individual journeys towards ἀταραξία, tranquillity.

In this essay, I examine the conversation between Zarathustra and his soul in the
concluding chapters of Part 3 of Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Building on my study’s claim that Zarathustra dies at the end of Part 3, I argue that this conversation is taking place between two of his person-stages: the person-stage who has grown old and is now ending his own life, and the person-stage who has been reborn and is now entering childhood. This conversation shows how Zarathustra’s older self has awakened his own childhood consciousness and is now using all of his wisdom to shape and educate it—a wisdom that then informs and propels his many journeys and teachings throughout the narrative. This conversation also shows that Zarathustra’s most important dying gift to his own childhood soul is his newly recovered
knowledge of eternal recurrence. This knowledge lies dormant in Zarathustra’s soul until he gains the lion’s strength needed to summon it up and then perishes as a result. Nietzsche thus invents a parthenogenetic protagonist whose life illustrates what is perhaps the first time-travel paradox ever written.

Ü<i ayda bir yayımlanır. Yayımlanan yazılardaki bilimsel görüş ve düşünceler yazanna aittir. Yazı ve her türlü görsel malzemenin yayın hakkı saklıdır. İzinsiz kullanılamaz .. MART.;. HAZİRAN 2001 PREHiSTORYA O ARKEOlOJi O ESKiçAG TARiHi -SANAT TARiHi O ETNOGRAFYAO NUMisMATiK "Ancak memleketimizin hemen her tarafında emsalsiz defineler halinde yatmakta olan kadim medeniyet eserlerinin ilerde tarafımızdan meydana çıkarılarak ilmi bir surette muhafaza ve tasnifleri ve geçen devirlerin sürekli ihmali yüzünden pek harap bir hale gelmiş olan abidelerin muhafazaları için müze müdürlüklerine ve hafriyat işlerinde kullanılmak üzere arkeoloji mütehassıslarına kat 'i lüzum vardır."

Una de las razones fundamentales por las cuales la muerte causa dolor se debe a una comprensión equívoca acerca del sentido último de la vida humana. Además, la Modernidad se desliga, en ocasiones, de la dimensión emotiva y afectiva del ser humano. Así pues, toda terapéutica del duelo mortuorio exige reflexionar con seriedad acerca del sentido de la muerte, tarea en la cual la tradición filosófica y teológica occidental es un apoyo ineludible. En la primera parte se ha de revisar, desde la perspectiva filosófica de Epicuro, la concepción de la muerte según la cual la opinión ordinaria es errada y no da cabida a una vida realizada como fundamento de la tranquilidad y la salud. En la segunda parte se esbozarán los rasgos y las notas esenciales de una concepción cristiana de la muerte a partir de la obra de San Agustín de Hipona, exponiendo algunas medidas concretas de preparación para la muerte con base en su pensamiento.

The satirical writings of Lucian of Samosata had a tremendous influence on the literature of the Eastern European Haskalah, shaping its criticism of the burgeoning Hasidic movement in the nineteenth century as if there were no gap between it and the Roman Empire of the second century. Lucian’s criticism of false prophets, self-proclaimed philosophers, and common fools and frauds, like his satirical dialogues with the world of the dead, provided the perfect model for those Maskilim who opposed the revelations of the Hasidic movement in both theological and social realms. One particularly salient testimony to the classical satirist’s influence is the astounding translation of his story “Alexander the False Prophet” by the Maskilic writer Meir Letteris, the first translation of Lucian’s work into Hebrew. The translation, printed in full below, was based on the German edition of Christoph Martin Wieland and published in the journal Ha-Tsefirah, which Letteris edited in 1823. As with every translation, it is a new product, shaped in and by its own context. This essay discusses the tendencies and apparent goals of the translator, the additions and omissions he made to the text, and the influence of Lucian’s satirical style on the Haskalah.

During the Hellenistic period, the different philosophical schools developed different theories and techniques of consolation. Epicurean technique called for distracting the mourner by pleasant memories and was widely practiced, even by those who were not philosophical hedonists. Th e technique was altered slightly as it passed into popular use, where in it came to be conceived as a kind of mental dissimulation or even as a therapeutic "beguiling" of the mind by any of a number of pleasant distractions. Th is forms the likely background to Ben Sira's advice to those confronting death at xiv 16 and xxx 23 to "beguile your soul," an observation that provides further evidence of Ben Sira's contact with and measured appropriation of Hellenistic intellectual culture. Despite his traditionalism Ben Sira was influenced on a number of points by the cosmopolitan social mores of his time. 1 It remains unclear, however, to what degree he was influenced by Hellenistic intellectual culture. 2 Stoic parallels are sometimes cited, and it is likely that at least a few of these (e.g., doctrine of opposites) are genuine borrowings. 3 Ben Sira also shows certain similarities *) Matt Goff read an earlier version of this paper and off ered a number of helpful recommendations.

This paper represents an aspect of my current work on the theology of the Epicureans, where I am interested in working out exactly what the Epicureans believed in. Here, I am focusing on Philodemus' conception of the gods, and considering how faithful to Epicurus he was in this area. Nichols (1976, 154) concludes that 'we accordingly accept the traditional view…that Lucretius was an atheist.' Sedley (1998, 102) refers to Lucretius as a fundamentalist -that, whereas other Epicurean philosophers have developed Epicurus' philosophy in the two hundred years since his death, Lucretius remains true to Epicurus. In this way, the philosophy of Lucretius would seem to be that of Epicurus.

La formule cicéronienne natura aut voluntas associe deux des contributions les plus originales de la philosophie hellénistique et romaine à la pensée éthique et politique occidentale. Les six premiers chapitres examinent éléments fondamentaux de la théorie stoïcienne de la natura et de la loi naturelle, en montrant que les Stoïciens ont inauguré une nouvelle conception de l’éthique dans l’Antiquité gréco-romaine – une idée qui était appelée à culminer avec la théorie de Kant.  Les chapitres portant sur les Épicuriens discutent ensuite la manière dont leur conception du plaisir et de la mort a forgé une notion de voluntas qui est aux origines de la notion moderne de libre arbitre. Les développements des deux derniers chapitres entendent montrer de quelle manière ces conceptions originales de la natura et de la voluntas sont devenues des piliers fondamentaux de la pensée éthique et politique des débuts de l’époque moderne .

Felsefî bir terim olarak temel erdem, verili bir ahlâk felsefesi içerisinde çeşitli nedenlerle ve farklı açılardan diğerlerine nispetle daha önemli, dolayısıyla da ayrıcalıklı görülen erdemi ifade etmektedir. Felsefe tarihinde ilk kez Sokrates (M.Ö. 469-399) ile karşımıza çıkan ayrıcalıklı erdem fikrinin, diğer bir deyişle temel erdem kavramının Sokrates’i müteakiben başta Platon (M.Ö. 427-347) ve Aristoteles (M.Ö. 384-322) olmak üzere önde gelen filozoflarda ve felsefe okullarında değişik biçimlerde karşımıza çıktığını, erdem konusunun önemini nispeten yitirdiği modern dönemlere değin gelişerek ve elbette ki aynı zamanda değişerek varlığını sürdürmeye devam ettiğini görmekteyiz. Bu tebliğ, ilgili kavramın bu uzun serüveni içerisindeki ana duraklardan birine odaklanmaktadır. Söz konusu durak, kabaca M.Ö. 4. yüzyıl ile M.S. 2. yüzyıl arası zaman dilimini kapsadığını belirtebileceğimiz Helenistik dönemin dört felsefe okulundan biri olan ve gerek etki gerekse yaygınlık itibariyle Stoacılıkla birlikte diğerleri arasında öne çıktığını söyleyebileceğimiz Epikürcülüktür. Epikürüs (M.Ö. 342-271) tarafından kurulan ve hayatın gayesini mutluluk olarak vaz edip onu da haz (hêdonê) ile özdeşleştiren bu felsefe okulu, teklif etmiş olduğu ahlâkî yaşam içerisinde ayrıcalıklı görülmeye aday iki ahlâkî değeri öne plana çıkartmaktadır. Bunlar dostluk (philia) ve amelî hikmettir (phronesis). Tebliğimizde onlardan her birini konumuz çerçevesinde değerlendirmeye ve anılan felsefe okulunun temel erdemini yahut erdemlerini belirlemeye gayret göstereceğiz. Böylelikle de Epikürcülüğün ahlâkî yaşamın temeline hangi erdem veya erdemleri yerleştirdiğini tespit etmiş olacağız. Böylesi bir tespitin ise bize, Epikürcü felsefenin idealize ettiği ahlâkî failin tam olarak nasıl bir mahiyete sahip bulunduğunu ve dolayısıyla da okul müntesiplerine ne türden bir ideal ahlâkî yaşam vadedildiğini daha iyi anlama noktasında katkı sağlayacağını düşünmekteyiz.

The cardinal virtue, as a philosophical term, refers to the virtue seen from different perspectives and for different purposes more valuable and privileged than others in the certain moral philosophy. The idea of privileged virtue, in other words, the concept of cardinal virtue manifested itself for the first time in the history of philosophy with Socrates (B.C. 469-399). Following him, we confront this concept in different ways within the philosophy of prominent philosophers, like Plato (B.C. 427-347) and Aristotle (B.C. 384-322), and philosophical schools. The concept of cardinal virtue had maintained its existence by flourishing and also changing until modern times when the issue of virtue relatively lost its importance. This paper focuses on one of the main stops in this long adventure of that concept. The aforementioned stop is Epicurean philosophy, which was one of four philosophical schools of the Hellenistic period (roughly B.C. 4.-A.D. 2) and became prominent alongside Stoicism among others in terms of influence and predominance. Epicurean school, established by Epicurus (B.C. 342-271), defined the principal goal of life as happiness and identified it with pleasure (hêdonê). This school highlights two moral values which may be seen as privileged within the moral life that it offers. These are friendship (philia) and practical wisdom (phronesis). In this paper, I will try to evaluate each of them in the framework of the topic and specify the cardinal virtue or virtues of Epicurean philosophy. In this way, I hope to uncover which virtue or virtues Epicurean school placed at the foundation of moral life. As a consequence, such a determination, I think, will contribute to the better understanding about both the essential character of the moral agent that Epicurean philosophy idealizes and which kind of ideal moral life Epicurean school promises to its followers.

Is death bad for the one who dies? This magazine article offers a sketch of some of the landscape of the debate concerning the evil of death. Published in an issue of ThinKnow Magazine on the topic of death.

Article online at https://thinknowmag.org/2020/04/23/is-death-an-evil/

Eighteenth-century Epicureanism is often viewed as radical, anti-religious, and politically dangerous. But to what extent does this simplify the ancient philosophy and underestimate its significance to the Enlightenment?

Through a pan-European analysis of Enlightenment centres from Scotland to Russia via the Netherlands, France and Germany, contributors argue that elements of classical Epicureanism were appropriated by radical and conservative writers alike. They move beyond literature and political theory to examine the application of Epicurean ideas in domains as diverse as physics, natural law, and the philosophy of language, drawing on the work of both major figures (Diderot, Helvétius, Smith and Hume) and of lesser-known but important thinkers (Johann Jacob Schmauss and Dmitrii Anichkov).

Determinism, Freedom, and Moral Responsibility brings together nine substantial essays on determinism, freedom, and moral responsibility in antiquity by Susanne Bobzien. The essays present the main ancient theories on these subjects, ranging historically from Aristotle followed by the Epicureans, the early Stoics, several later Stoics, and up to Alexander of Aphrodisias in the third century ce. The author discusses questions about rational and autonomous human agency and their compatibility with a large range of important philosophical issues, including their compatibility with divine predetermination and other theological questions; with atomism and continuum theory and with the physical sciences more generally; with the determination of character and its development from childhood through nature and nurture; with epistemic features such as ignorance of circumstances; with theories of necessity, possibility and contingency; with external or internal preceding causes and impediments; and with folk theories of fatalism. Room is also given to the questions of how human autonomous agency is related to moral development, to virtue and wisdom, and to blame and praise. Historically unified, philosophically profound, and methodologically rigorous, Bobzien's essays show that in Classical and Hellenistic philosophy these topics were all debated without reference to freedom to do otherwise or to a free will, and that the latter two notions were fully developed only later. The volume will be of interest both to philosophers and to historians of philosophy, with more than half of the essays accessible to advanced undergraduates.

Abstract: In this article I try to narrow the time frame for the composition of Epicurus’ Letter to Menoeceus and take in consideration some hypotheses about the addressee of the letter. This is done by evaluating a passage in Philodemus’ Ad contubernales, in
which the sons of Menoeceus are mentioned. In addition to the date occurring there
the previous statements on the date of composition of the Letter to Herodotus are
taken in consideration, where – like in the Letter to Menoeceus – is mentioned the
notion of prolepsis. This term Epicurus comments in Nat. XXVIII, dated by a subscriptio,
which is why also this circumstance is included in the discussion. Purpose of
these reflections is to draw conclusions from the dates just referred to on the Letter
to Menoeceus. Finally will be considered the possibility that the letter could be composed
by Epicurus as a literary monument for his pupil Menoeceus, which would allow
to expand the chronological frame in discussion.