TY - JOUR

T1 - The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism

AU - Shakhnovich, Marianna M.

N1 - Shakhnovich, M. M. (2019). The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 35(3), 461–471. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2019.306

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The article explores the presentation methods of a philosophical doctrine in Greek and Roman Epicureanism; it is shown that for the ancient, middle, and Roman Epicureans a controversy with representatives of other philosophical schools was a typical way of presenting their own views. The polemical practice, in which the basic principles of Epicureanism were expounded through the criticism of other philosophical systems, first of all, Academics and Stoics, was considered not only as the preferred way of presenting the own doctrine, but also as the most convenient rhetorical device, which had, among other things, didactic significance. The founder of the school, Epicurus, often included in his texts the terms used in other philosophical schools, giving them a different, often opposite, content. While presenting his teaching in the treatise “On Nature” or in letters to his followers, Epicurus pushed off the opinions of Democritus, Plato, and the Stoics, but resorted mainly to implicit criticism of his opponents, often without naming them by name. His closest students and later followers - Metrodorus, Hermarchus, Colotes, Philodemus, Lucretius, Diogenes of Oenoanda - continuing the controversy with the Academics and the Stoics, more frankly expressed their indignation about the “falsely understood Epicureanism” or erroneous opinions. In their writings, satirical techniques and angry denunciations were often used to criticize opponents. The focus of the article is on the controversy of Epicurus with Plato; the interpretation of the concept of “anticipation” in Epicurus and the Stoics, the polemic controversies and the use of the principle of “refraining from judgment”, drawn from the Stoics, to criticize Academics. In addition, the article analyzes the rhetorical tricks of Philodemus, who believed that frank speech is not only the best way to heal the soul, but also a method of philosophical controversy.

AB - The article explores the presentation methods of a philosophical doctrine in Greek and Roman Epicureanism; it is shown that for the ancient, middle, and Roman Epicureans a controversy with representatives of other philosophical schools was a typical way of presenting their own views. The polemical practice, in which the basic principles of Epicureanism were expounded through the criticism of other philosophical systems, first of all, Academics and Stoics, was considered not only as the preferred way of presenting the own doctrine, but also as the most convenient rhetorical device, which had, among other things, didactic significance. The founder of the school, Epicurus, often included in his texts the terms used in other philosophical schools, giving them a different, often opposite, content. While presenting his teaching in the treatise “On Nature” or in letters to his followers, Epicurus pushed off the opinions of Democritus, Plato, and the Stoics, but resorted mainly to implicit criticism of his opponents, often without naming them by name. His closest students and later followers - Metrodorus, Hermarchus, Colotes, Philodemus, Lucretius, Diogenes of Oenoanda - continuing the controversy with the Academics and the Stoics, more frankly expressed their indignation about the “falsely understood Epicureanism” or erroneous opinions. In their writings, satirical techniques and angry denunciations were often used to criticize opponents. The focus of the article is on the controversy of Epicurus with Plato; the interpretation of the concept of “anticipation” in Epicurus and the Stoics, the polemic controversies and the use of the principle of “refraining from judgment”, drawn from the Stoics, to criticize Academics. In addition, the article analyzes the rhetorical tricks of Philodemus, who believed that frank speech is not only the best way to heal the soul, but also a method of philosophical controversy.

KW - Academic Scepticism

KW - Colotes

KW - Epicureanism

KW - Epicurus

KW - Philodemus

KW - Polemic method

KW - Roman Epicureanism

KW - Stoicism

KW - Эпикур

KW - эпикуреизм

KW - Колот

KW - Филодем

KW - римский эпикуреизм

KW - стоицизм

KW - Скептицизм

KW - полемический прием

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077045816&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://philosophyjournal.spbu.ru/article/view/6282

UR - https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=41297025

U2 - 10.21638/spbu17.2019.306

DO - 10.21638/spbu17.2019.306

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85077045816

VL - 35

SP - 461

EP - 471

JO - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

JF - Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология

SN - 2542-2278

IS - 3

ER -