In a recent/ongoing re-reading of Seneca’s ‘Letters to Lucilius’ I was very struck, again, by the number of times he cited Epicurus…much more often than the Stoics.
Epicurus might add to the discussion, but he does not acknowledge his source, which is, of course and as usual, Plato (Politeia):
“And he, too, would control by force all his appetites for pleasure that are wasters and not winners of wealth, those which are denominated unnecessary... desires that we cannot divert or suppress may be properly called necessary, [558e] and likewise those whose satisfaction is beneficial to us, may they not? For our nature compels us to seek their satisfaction. [559a] Is not that so ?” “Most assuredly.” “Then we shall rightly use the word ‘necessary’ of them...And may we not call the one group the spendthrift (analōtikos, expensive) desires and the other the profitable (khrēmatistikos for trade and money-making) because they help production (khrēsimos useful, serviceable) “Surely.” “And we shall say the same of sexual and other appetites?” “The same.” “And were we not saying that the man whom we nicknamed the drone is the man who teems with such pleasures and appetites, and who is governed by his unnecessary desires, while the one who is ruled [559d] by his necessary appetites is the thrifty oligarchical man?” (558d-559d)
Massimo, so this letter is mainly about the “good life,” and not about what is necessary: to food, clothing, shelter, or about “relieving” discomfort with medicine, surgery, and medical equipment? I am trying to overlay the three categories—
Category 1: natural and necessary;
Category 2: natural, but not necessary;
Category 3: unnatural and unnecessary—
with the the discomfort part. I am guessing it is more about our unnecessary desires for things that we believe will give us freedom from discomfort. 🤨
Nicely put, this is a good way to sort things out. I need a working automobile to commute to work; it’s nice to have a recent model that has heated seats and parking/lane change cameras because I’m 62; it’s unnecessary to buy the Ford Mustang Dark Horse Premium 5L V-8 that would impress my friends and family. So I bought a Hyundai Tucson instead. It replaced a 2001 Ford Escape and I intend to keep it just as long.
One thing that the Stoic in me notes about the unnecessary undesirables in Epictetus’s three-part system is that they are things that are not only on the hedonic treadmill of never enough, they are things that can be easily lost or diminished in value. I never want to own a car that is so expensive that I would be worried to leave it unattended in a public place. For the unnecessary undesirables attract envy and undesirable attention.
In a recent/ongoing re-reading of Seneca’s ‘Letters to Lucilius’ I was very struck, again, by the number of times he cited Epicurus…much more often than the Stoics.
Epicurus might add to the discussion, but he does not acknowledge his source, which is, of course and as usual, Plato (Politeia):
“And he, too, would control by force all his appetites for pleasure that are wasters and not winners of wealth, those which are denominated unnecessary... desires that we cannot divert or suppress may be properly called necessary, [558e] and likewise those whose satisfaction is beneficial to us, may they not? For our nature compels us to seek their satisfaction. [559a] Is not that so ?” “Most assuredly.” “Then we shall rightly use the word ‘necessary’ of them...And may we not call the one group the spendthrift (analōtikos, expensive) desires and the other the profitable (khrēmatistikos for trade and money-making) because they help production (khrēsimos useful, serviceable) “Surely.” “And we shall say the same of sexual and other appetites?” “The same.” “And were we not saying that the man whom we nicknamed the drone is the man who teems with such pleasures and appetites, and who is governed by his unnecessary desires, while the one who is ruled [559d] by his necessary appetites is the thrifty oligarchical man?” (558d-559d)
Massimo, so this letter is mainly about the “good life,” and not about what is necessary: to food, clothing, shelter, or about “relieving” discomfort with medicine, surgery, and medical equipment? I am trying to overlay the three categories—
Category 1: natural and necessary;
Category 2: natural, but not necessary;
Category 3: unnatural and unnecessary—
with the the discomfort part. I am guessing it is more about our unnecessary desires for things that we believe will give us freedom from discomfort. 🤨
Nicely put, this is a good way to sort things out. I need a working automobile to commute to work; it’s nice to have a recent model that has heated seats and parking/lane change cameras because I’m 62; it’s unnecessary to buy the Ford Mustang Dark Horse Premium 5L V-8 that would impress my friends and family. So I bought a Hyundai Tucson instead. It replaced a 2001 Ford Escape and I intend to keep it just as long.
One thing that the Stoic in me notes about the unnecessary undesirables in Epictetus’s three-part system is that they are things that are not only on the hedonic treadmill of never enough, they are things that can be easily lost or diminished in value. I never want to own a car that is so expensive that I would be worried to leave it unattended in a public place. For the unnecessary undesirables attract envy and undesirable attention.
The three kinds of pleasure are very obvious but one doesn’t thinks of it. Nice way to start one’s week with the wisdom shared. Thanks