FLEV - "Epicurus"

EPICURUS

1) Physics (“Owner”)
2) Logic (“Rhetor”)
3) Emotion (“Cracker”)
4) Will (“Serf”)

Despite the 3rd Emotion, the “Epicurus” do not at all give the impression of being cold people. They are warm, and at first impressions they can easily be compared to teddy bears: the same massiveness, combined with leisurelyness, laziness and softness. The obvious mercantilism of the “Epicurean” psychology does not at all smack of stinginess, but takes almost eccentric forms of loving, thoughtful monetary calculation down to the last penny. A timid half-smile often illuminates the childish, timeless face of the “epicure.” The speech is quiet, even, but consistent in its logical coherence; it lacks one thing - energy filling to be truly convincing. And it is precisely by smooth, deliberate, but unsteady speech that it is easiest to recognize an “epicure.”

* * *

Regarding Epicurus, there is a long-standing misconception that confuses his worldview with the worldview of Aristippus (see), Epicureanism with hedonism, i.e. a philosophy based on the principle of the primacy of carnal pleasures over all others. But in fact, since the psychotypes of Epicurus and Aristippus are different, their philosophies were correspondingly different. Apparently, the misconception regarding Epicurus’s views arose during his lifetime, and he had to publicly disavow accusations of hedonism. Epicurus wrote: “...When we say that pleasure is the ultimate goal, we do not mean the pleasures of debauchery or sensuality, as those who do not know, do not share or poorly understand our teaching believe - no, we mean freedom from suffering body and from the turmoil of the soul. For it is not endless drinking and holidays, not the enjoyment of boys and women or the fish table and other joys of a luxurious feast that make our life sweet, but only sober reasoning.”

At the same time, Epicurus was not an ascetic wandering in the world of pure abstractions. He had the 1st Physics, which forces us to take with the greatest seriousness everything connected with sensory perception. But since Epicurus combined the 1st Physics with the 4th Will, which does not crave self-affirmation, and with it extremes, the strong inclination towards debauchery, gluttony and love of money found no basis in his psyche. If Epicurus’s 1st Physics is clearly demonstrated in anything, it is in the crude materialism of his philosophy. Here, perhaps, is one of the most characteristic passages outlining the foundations of Epicureanism: “Every sensation, he says, is unreasonable and independent of memory: neither by itself, nor from an outside impulse it can add or subtract anything. It is also impossible to refute it... the mind cannot refute sensations, because it itself relies entirely on sensations; and one sensation cannot refute another, because we trust each of them. The very existence of perceptions serves as confirmation of the truth of feelings. After all, we actually see, hear, experience pain; from here, starting from the obvious, one must also conclude about the meaning of what is not so clear. For all our thoughts arise from sensations due to their coincidence, proportionality, similarity or comparison, and reason only contributes to this. The visions of madmen and sleepers are also true, because they set in motion (the senses), and the non-existent is not capable of this.

...those who claim that the soul is incorporeal speak nonsense: if it were so, it could neither act nor experience action, while we clearly see that both of these properties are inherent in the soul... the soul consists of atoms the smoothest and roundest..."

From the statements of Epicurus it clearly follows that his deep-rooted materialism went as far as possible: even hallucinations and dreams are true for him, since they are visible, and the soul consists of atoms, and it is even known which ones. However, such a position is natural for 1st Physics.

It is even more curious that Epicurus placed reason after sensory perception. And although he directly derived the intellect from sensations and only from them, i.e. denied the existence of pure abstractions, rationalism obviously occupied second place in Epicureanism after materialism. And this is a clear sign of the 2nd Logic. The same is evidenced by the unique fertility of Epicurus (300 scrolls), which, according to biographers, surpasses everything that was done in the golden age of Greek philosophy.

He was also wonderful simply as an interlocutor. Every day crowds of students and admirers gathered in the famous garden of Epicurus, but such gatherings did not burden the philosopher, but, on the contrary, brought real pleasure. In general, for a person, like Epicurus, who has processional Logic and Emotion, the functions are predominantly speech, communication is the main and never-satiable pleasure of life. Is it any wonder in this regard that Epicurus devoted all his time, free from writing books, to leisurely friendly conversations in the garden, neglecting even the carnal pleasures in which the Greece of his time was so rich.

There are few indications of the 3rd Emotion of Epicurus, but they exist. First of all, this is the dryness and dullness of presentation characteristic of his writings. Moreover, this kind of stylelessness of style was fundamental for the philosopher. Describing a true sage, as he imagined him, Epicurus noted that “he will not speak beautiful speeches.” There is also another remark characteristic of the 3rd Emotion: “The sage alone is able to correctly judge poetry and music, although he himself will not write poetry.”

Epicurus was sincerely indifferent to politics and, even a little afraid of it, argued that the sage “would not be involved in state affairs.” However, he did not exclude the possibility that the sage “will help the ruler when the opportunity comes,” but he certainly “will not become a tyrant.” Epicurus himself, despite all his influence in society, diligently avoided all kinds of official positions, and in such apoliticality, under the most favorable conditions for engaging in politics and the terrible politicization of Athens at that time, the 4th Will of the philosopher is already visible. Epicurus knew that he was not born for power, for leadership, and everything that he offered on his own to the leader, the ruler, consisted of some kind of “help” that was not clear in content, nothing more.

In general, the philosopher’s wish to his students to “live their lives unnoticed” can be considered programmatic for the 4th Will.

* * *

From the life and philosophy of Epicurus it is clear that people of his type rarely leave a noticeable mark on world history. And therefore, when trying to find other “epicures”, especially in politics, only one came to mind - Georgy Malenkov - the caliph for the hour of the Soviet Union.

Khrushchev and Molotov directly spoke about Malenkov’s weak character, and when this kind of reproach is thrown by people who themselves are not distinguished by strength of character, we are obviously talking about the 4th Will. Malenkov began his career as a military clerk, and probably would have remained at the bottom of the social ladder if he had not married a petty but ambitious employee of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. It was she who began to push him in the back, forcing him to move his legs along the steps of his clerical career (it was not for nothing that Epicurus was an opponent of marriage!), It was his wife who got him a job as the technical secretary of the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee of the party. In this position, he proved himself to be an intelligent bureaucrat and was transferred higher, to the technical secretaries of the Politburo. It was here, apparently, that Malenkov was noticed by Stalin. Feeling a kinship in the 1st Physics and 2nd Logic and having confidence only in people with the 4th Will, loyal, flexible people, Stalin himself dragged Malenkov up the steps of the career ladder.

Strange as it may seem, among politicians, except Stalin, Malenkov was appreciated only by foreigners. Here are some of his foreign characteristics: “He is smart and careful, like a wild cat. A French politician who met Malenkov during his rise told me: “He reminds me of young Laval.” Like the latter, he combined a keen mind with the greatest self-control and discretion.” “His Russian was the best I have heard from Soviet leaders. It was a pleasure to listen to his speeches. Malenkov’s speeches were well constructed and there was logic in them... More importantly, Malenkov thought, in my opinion, to the greatest extent in Western style compared to other Soviet leaders. He at least understood our position, and although he did not accept it, I still felt he understood it. With other leaders, especially with Khrushchev, there was no points of contact, no common language..” “He gives the impression of a secretive, cautious and sickly person, but under the folds of oily skin, it would seem that a completely different person should live, a lively and intelligent person with intelligent, penetrating black eyes.”

There is no reason to list all the stages of Malenkov’s path to the pinnacle of power. The secret of his success, obviously, lay in absolute loyalty to Stalin. When the latter organized grandiose drinking parties for his entourage in the hope of identifying a secret enemy in this way, Malenkov drank himself into insensibility. Although, as it turned out later, he hated alcohol, after Stalin’s death he himself stopped drinking and closed the drinking establishments in the country, thereby giving rise to the sad custom of drinking vodka “for three” in the gateways.

Malenkov’s finest hour came at the moment when the dying Stalin, of all those close to him, shook his hand. From that moment on, Malenkov stood at the head of the state for almost a whole year, until Khrushchev’s hands were free to pull the reins of power from Malenkov’s weak hands. He gave up power practically without resistance and, perhaps, even, like any “epicurus”, with secret relief, a person freed from an unbearable burden. In any case, returning home after being overthrown from Olympus, he told his worried relatives one thing: “Everything remains the same.” Judging by this statement, Malenkov did not even notice how he fell from the chair of the first person in the state to the chair of just a minister, an event , which, if he had been the least bit ambitious, of course, would have been perceived tragically. For Malenkov, everything really remained the same, since, by Western standards, the modest comfort that he and his relatives had before the overthrow, no one encroached (1st Physics + 4th Will).

Malenkov’s government career as director of the Ekibastuz State District Power Plant was ending. And here’s what’s remarkable: the local regional committee once reprimanded him “for being familiar with the workers,” which may seem surprising to us if we remember Epicurus, who treated himself as an equal even with slaves and allowed into his philosophical room anyone who did not come.