伊壁鳩魯主義與眾不同 (6) —— 與其他經典哲學的對話

歡迎來到我們伊壁鳩魯主義系列的壓軸篇章！在前面的文章中，我們深入探討了伊壁鳩魯的生平、他如何定義真正的快樂、管理欲望的藝術、戰勝死亡的獨特論證，以及友誼與正義作為幸福基石的角色。現在，是時候將伊壁鳩魯主義置於更廣闊的哲學圖景中，通過與一些著名的東方和西方經典哲學的比較，來進一步深化我們對它的理解。

伊壁鳩魯主義長期以來被誤解，甚至被曲解為簡單的享樂主義。通過比較，我們可以清晰地看到它的獨特之處，並理解它為何是，且仍然是，一條通往平靜幸福生活的務實之道。

1. 伊壁鳩魯主義 vs. 斯多葛主義（西方）

斯多葛主義和伊壁鳩魯主義是古希臘羅馬時期最著名的兩大哲學流派，它們常常被視為競爭對手。

• 相似之處： 兩個學派都致力於教導人們如何達到內心的平靜（ataraxia），並強調自給自足和減少對外部事物的依賴。兩者都認為理性是實現幸福的關鍵。
  
  

• 主要區別：
  
  

• 最終目標：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 追求“快樂”，即身體的無痛和心靈的寧靜。它以快樂為最高善。

• 斯多葛主義： 追求“美德”本身作為唯一的善。快樂或痛苦是“無關緊要的”（indifferent）。

• 對待情感和痛苦：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 旨在通過明智的選擇來消除或避免痛苦和煩惱。痛苦是需要消除的惡。

• 斯多葛主義： 強調對情感的漠然（apatheia），接受命運，專注於我們能控制的事物（我們的判斷和美德），對外部的痛苦和逆境保持超然。痛苦是生命的自然組成部分，應被接受而非避免。

• 外部事物的價值：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 承認一些外部事物（如友誼、基本生活需求）對幸福的重要性，但強調要適度且不依賴。

• 斯多葛主義： 認為除了美德之外，所有外部事物（包括健康、財富、甚至朋友）都是無關緊要的，不應影響一個人的平靜。

• 伊壁鳩魯核心對比句：“我們所說的快樂，是指身體的無痛和靈魂的無擾。”
  斯多葛主義名言（例如，愛比克泰德）：“困擾人們的並非事物本身，而是他們對事物的看法。”
  這種對比揭示了伊壁鳩魯更注重通過調整外部環境和自身欲望來獲得平靜，而斯多葛主義則更強調通過內心的韌性和對命運的接受來達到平靜。

2. 伊壁鳩魯主義 vs. 孔子（儒家）（東方）

將伊壁鳩魯主義與中國讀者熟知的儒家思想進行比較，能清晰地展現兩種文化背景下對“好生活”截然不同的追求。

• 相似之處： 兩個體系都重視人際關係（友誼/仁愛）和社會的和諧穩定，認為它們對個人福祉至關重要。
  
  

• 主要區別：
  
  

• 對世界的參與：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 提倡“隱秘的生活”（lathe biōsas），主張個人應遠離政治紛爭和社會名利，專注於小社群內的平靜與友誼，以避免外部煩擾。

• 名言：“過隱秘的生活。”
  
  
  

• 儒家： 強調入世和積極的社會參與。孔子認為君子應修身、齊家、治國、平天下，通過參與社會實踐和擔當政治責任來實現個人價值和天下大同。

• 孔子名言（《論語》）：“君子憂道不憂貧。”
  
  

• 幸福的來源和定義：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 幸福源於個體的身體無痛和心靈寧靜，是一種內心的體驗。

• 儒家： 幸福和“樂”與道德修養、社會責任的履行、以及和諧的社會秩序緊密相連。例如，“有朋自遠方來，不亦樂乎？”中的“樂”不僅是友誼的愉悅，也包含道義上的認同。

• 關注的焦點：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 側重於個體如何通過明智的選擇獲得平靜和幸福。

• 儒家： 更注重人倫關係和社會秩序。個人價值在家族、社會、國家等層層關係中實現。

• 這種對比突出了伊壁鳩魯主義的個人主義傾向（儘管是社群化的個人主義），與儒家強烈的社會性和集體責任感形成鮮明對照。

3. 伊壁鳩魯主義 vs. 佛教（東方）

乍一看，伊壁鳩魯主義和佛教似乎有許多相似之處，但它們的核心方法和最終目標卻截然不同。

• 相似之處： 兩個體系都致力於解決人類的痛苦，並強調對欲望的理解和管理是通往平靜的關鍵。兩者都鼓勵一種相對節制的生活方式。
  
  

• 主要區別：
  
  

• 痛苦的根源：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 痛苦主要來源於對神靈和死亡的非理性恐懼，以及對不必要欲望的追求。

• 佛教： 痛苦（Dukkha）的根源是“執着”或“貪愛”（Trishna）以及無明。

• 解決方案：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 通過理性的思考消除恐懼，並通過明智選擇和節制來管理欲望，以達到現世的身體無痛和心緒寧靜。

• 佛教： 通過八正道消除貪嗔痴，最終達到涅槃（Nirvana），即徹底熄滅所有煩惱和執着，超越輪迴。

• 對世界的看法：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 世界由原子組成，可被理解和操控（有限制地）以獲得快樂。生命是有限的。

• 佛教： 強調世界的無常、無我、苦的本質，並視生命為輪迴的一部分。

• 伊壁鳩魯核心對比句：“一種正確的理解，即死亡與我們無關，這使生命的有限性變得令人愉悅，不是通過給予它無限的時間，而是通過消除對不朽的渴望。”
  佛教核心思想（四聖諦）： “生是苦，老是苦，病是苦，死是苦；愛別離是苦，怨憎會是苦，求不得是苦，總而言之，五取蘊皆苦。”
  伊壁鳩魯尋求在現有生命中實現最好的狀態，而佛教則旨在從生命的循環中徹底解脫。

4. 伊壁鳩魯主義 vs. 道家（東方）

伊壁鳩魯主義和道家在某些方面也有有趣的相似之處，尤其是在對簡單生活的追求上。

• 相似之處： 兩者都提倡一種與世無爭、返璞歸真的生活態度，避免過度追求世俗的名利和權力。都強調順應自然。
  
  

• 主要區別：
  
  

• 實現路徑：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 通過理性的計算和選擇來追求“快樂”（寧靜），強調個人對生活的積極掌控。

• 道家： 強調“無為”和“自然”，順應“道”的自然規律，避免人為干預，以達到一種與宇宙和諧統一的狀態。

• 社會參與：

• 伊壁鳩魯主義： 提倡“隱秘的生活”，但仍重視友誼和基於效用的正義契約。

• 道家： 往往更傾向於個體融入自然，對社會結構持批判或疏離態度。

• 伊壁鳩魯核心對比句：“過隱秘的生活。” (強調個人選擇和避免社會煩擾)
  道家核心思想（老子）：“道常無為而無不為。” (強調順其自然，不主動作為卻能成就一切)
  伊壁鳩魯的寧靜是通過積極的理性選擇和規避風險達成的，而道家的寧靜則更多地來源於對宇宙自然秩序的順應和“無為”的智慧。

結語：伊壁鳩魯主義的獨特光芒

通過這些比較，我們可以看到伊壁鳩魯主義並非簡單地鼓勵享樂，也不同於斯多葛主義的嚴苛美德觀，或佛教的解脫之路，亦非道家的完全順應自然，更與儒家積極入世的理想截然不同。

它獨特地提供了一條立足於此生此世，通過明智的理性選擇和對欲望與恐懼的精準管理，來達到持久的平靜與滿足的道路。它肯定了物質世界和感官體驗，但強調的是它們的適度和正確使用，以服務於更深層次的幸福。

伊壁鳩魯的智慧在今天依然具有強大的生命力，它呼籲我們審視自己的生活，重新定義快樂，並勇敢地消除那些不必要的煩惱。這或許正是古老智慧給現代人帶來的一束光芒。

感謝您跟隨這個系列，希望它能點亮您對伊壁鳩魯主義的理解！

Epicureanism Stands Apart (6) – A Dialogue with Other Classic Philosophies

Welcome to the concluding chapter of our series on Epicureanism! In previous posts, we've delved into Epicurus's life, how he defined true pleasure, the art of managing desires, his unique argument for conquering death, and the crucial role of friendship and justice as cornerstones of happiness. Now, it's time to place Epicureanism within the broader philosophical landscape, deepening our understanding by comparing it with some well-known classical philosophies, both Eastern and Western.

Epicureanism has long been misunderstood, often misconstrued as mere hedonism. Through comparison, we can clearly see its distinctiveness and understand why it was, and still is, a practical path to a peaceful and happy life.

1. Epicureanism vs. Stoicism (Western)

Stoicism and Epicureanism were the two most prominent philosophical schools in ancient Greece and Rome, often seen as rivals.

• Similarities: Both schools aimed to teach individuals how to achieve inner peace (ataraxia) and emphasized self-sufficiency and reducing dependence on external things. Both saw reason as crucial for achieving happiness.
  
  

• Key Differences:
  
  

• Ultimate Goal:

• Epicureanism: Pursues "pleasure," defined as the absence of bodily pain and mental disturbance. It views pleasure as the highest good.

• Stoicism: Pursues "virtue" itself as the sole good. Pleasure or pain are considered "indifferent."

• Approach to Emotions and Pain:

• Epicureanism: Aims to eliminate or avoid pain and disturbance through wise choices. Pain is an evil to be removed.

• Stoicism: Emphasizes indifference (apatheia) to emotions, acceptance of fate, and focusing on what one can control (one's judgments and virtues), remaining detached from external pain and adversity. Pain is a natural part of life, to be endured, not avoided.

• Value of External Things:

• Epicureanism: Acknowledges the importance of some external things (like friendship, basic necessities) for happiness, but emphasizes moderation and non-dependence.

• Stoicism: Believes all external things (including health, wealth, even friends), apart from virtue, are indifferent and should not affect one's tranquility.

• Epicurean Core Contrast Quote: "When we say, then, that pleasure is the end and aim... by pleasure we mean the absence of pain in the body and trouble in the soul."
  Stoic Quote (e.g., Epictetus): "It is not things that disturb us, but our interpretation of their significance."
  This contrast reveals Epicurus's focus on achieving peace by adjusting external circumstances and managing desires, whereas Stoicism emphasizes inner resilience and acceptance of fate.

2. Epicureanism vs. Confucianism (Confucius) (Eastern)

Comparing Epicureanism with Confucian thought, well-known to Chinese readers, clearly highlights the starkly different pursuits of a "good life" from two distinct cultural backgrounds.

• Similarities: Both systems value human relationships (friendship / benevolence) and social harmony, seeing them as vital for individual well-being.
  
  

• Key Differences:
  
  

• Engagement with the World:

• Epicureanism: Advocates for a "hidden life" (lathe biōsas), suggesting individuals should withdraw from political strife and social ambition, focusing on tranquility and friendship within a small community to avoid external disturbances.

• Quote: "Live unknown."
  
  

• Confucianism: Emphasizes active engagement and social participation. Confucius believed that a noble person (Junzi) should cultivate themselves, manage their family, govern the state, and bring peace to the world, realizing personal value through social practice and political responsibility.

• Confucius Quote (from the Analects): "The superior person is distressed by the inability to cultivate the Way, not by poverty." (君子憂道不憂貧。)
  
  

• Source and Definition of Happiness:

• Epicureanism: Happiness stems from individual bodily painlessness and mental tranquility, an internal experience.

• Confucianism: Happiness and "joy" are intimately linked with moral cultivation, the fulfillment of social responsibilities, and a harmonious social order. For instance, the "joy" in "Having friends come from afar, is this not a joy?" (有朋自遠方來，不亦樂乎？) includes not only the pleasure of friendship but also moral recognition.

• Primary Focus:

• Epicureanism: Focuses on how the individual can achieve peace and happiness through wise choices.

• Confucianism: Places greater emphasis on human relations and social order. Individual value is realized within layers of relationships: family, society, and the state.

• This comparison highlights Epicureanism's individualistic tendency (albeit a communal individualism) in stark contrast to Confucianism's strong social orientation and collective sense of responsibility.

3. Epicureanism vs. Buddhism (Eastern)

At first glance, Epicureanism and Buddhism might seem to share many similarities, but their core methodologies and ultimate goals diverge significantly.

• Similarities: Both systems aim to address human suffering and emphasize that understanding and managing desires are key to achieving tranquility. Both encourage a relatively moderate lifestyle.
  
  

• Key Differences:
  
  

• Source of Suffering:

• Epicureanism: Suffering primarily arises from irrational fears of gods and death, and the pursuit of unnecessary desires.

• Buddhism: The root of suffering (Dukkha) is "attachment" or "craving" (Trishna) and ignorance.

• Solution:

• Epicureanism: Eliminates fear through rational thought and manages desires through wise choice and moderation to achieve present-life bodily painlessness and mental tranquility.

• Buddhism: Eliminates greed, hatred, and delusion through the Eightfold Path, ultimately reaching Nirvana, which is the complete cessation of all afflictions and attachments, transcending the cycle of rebirth.

• View of the World:

• Epicureanism: The world is made of atoms, understandable and manageable (with limits) for acquiring pleasure. Life is finite.

• Buddhism: Emphasizes the impermanence, non-self, and suffering nature of the world, viewing life as part of a cycle of rebirth.

• Epicurean Core Contrast Quote: "A correct understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not by adding an infinite span of time but by removing the desire for immortality."
  Buddhist Core Teaching (Four Noble Truths): "Suffering is inherent in life; suffering is caused by desire; suffering can be ceased; suffering can be ceased by following the Eightfold Path."
  Epicurus sought to achieve the best possible state within this existing life, while Buddhism aims for complete liberation from the cycle of life.

4. Epicureanism vs. Daoism (Eastern)

Epicureanism and Daoism also share some interesting parallels, especially in their pursuit of a simple life.

• Similarities: Both advocate a non-contentious, back-to-nature attitude, avoiding excessive pursuit of worldly fame and power. Both emphasize living in accordance with nature.
  
  

• Key Differences:
  
  

• Path to Achievement:

• Epicureanism: Through rational calculation and choice to pursue "pleasure" (tranquility), emphasizing active personal control over one's life.

• Daoism: Emphasizes "Wu Wei" (non-action) and "Ziran" (naturalness), flowing with the natural laws of the "Dao," avoiding artificial interference to achieve harmony with the universe.

• Social Engagement:

• Epicureanism: Advocates for "living unknown," but still values friendship and utility-based compacts of justice.

• Daoism: Often leans more towards individual integration with nature, holding a critical or detached view of social structures.

• Epicurean Core Contrast Quote: "Live unknown." (Emphasizing personal choice and avoidance of social vexation)
  Daoist Core Teaching (Laozi): "The Tao is always inactive, yet there is nothing left undone." (強調順其自然，不主動作為卻能成就一切)
  Epicurean tranquility is achieved through active rational choice and risk avoidance, whereas Daoist tranquility is derived more from aligning with the natural order of the cosmos and the wisdom of "non-action."

Conclusion: The Unique Radiance of Epicureanism

Through these comparisons, we can see that Epicureanism is not simply about encouraging indulgence. Nor is it identical to Stoicism's rigorous virtue ethics, Buddhism's path to liberation, Daoism's complete surrender to nature, or Confucianism's ideal of active social engagement.

It uniquely offers a path rooted in this life, in the here and now, achievable through wise rational choice and the precise management of desires and fears, to attain lasting peace and contentment. It affirms the material world and sensory experience but emphasizes their moderation and correct use to serve a deeper, more profound happiness.

Epicurus's wisdom retains powerful vitality today. It calls us to examine our lives, redefine happiness, and courageously eliminate unnecessary troubles. Perhaps this is the ray of ancient wisdom shining upon modern humanity.

Thank you for following this series; I hope it has illuminated your understanding of Epicureanism!