User:Donpalmtree/sandbox

Article evaluation
Epicureanism is the topic i have chosen. This is because there are certain small but important pieces of information that need to be addressed within the article. Mostly information on epicurean outlooks on politics, implications of the principles of atomism, some explanation of Epicurean ethics and a small note on epicurean theological thought.

Politics
Epicurean ideas on politics disagree with other philosophical traditions, namely the Stoic, Platonist and Aristotelian traditions. To Epicureans all our social relations are a matter of how we perceive each other, of customs and traditions. No one is inherently of higher value or meant to dominate another. That is because there is no metaphysical basis for the superiority of one kind of person, all people are made of the same atomic material and are thus naturally equal. Epicureans also discourage political participation and other involvement in politics. However Epicureans are not apolitical, it is possible that some political association could be seen as beneficial by some Epicureans. Some political associations could lead to certain benefits to the individual that would help to maximize pleasure and avoid physical or mental distress.

The avoidance or freedom from hardship and fear is ideal to the Epicureans. While this avoidance or freedom could conceivably be achieved through political means it was insisted by Epicurus that involvement in politics would not release one from fear and he advised against a life of politics. Epicurus also discouraged contributing to political society by starting a family, as the benefits of a wife and children are outweighed by the trouble brought about by having a family. Instead Epicurus encouraged a formation of a community of friends outside the traditional political state. This community of virtuous friends would focus on internal affairs and justice.

However Epicureanism is adaptable to circumstance as is the Epicurean approach to politics. The same approaches will not always work in protection from pain and fear. In some situations it will be more beneficial to have a family and in other situations it will be more beneficial to participate in politics. It is ultimately up to the Epicurean to analyze their circumstance and take whatever action befits the situation.

What i put on the page excluding a sentence at the opening paragraph and reorganization of headings
all this under

-Politics
Epicurean ideas on politics disagree with other philosophical traditions, namely the Stoic, Platonist and Aristotelian traditions. To Epicureans all our social relations are a matter of how we perceive each other, of customs and traditions. No one is inherently of higher value or meant to dominate another. That is because there is no metaphysical basis for the superiority of one kind of person, all people are made of the same atomic material and are thus naturally equal. Epicureans also discourage political participation and other involvement in politics. However Epicureans are not apolitical, it is possible that some political association could be seen as beneficial by some Epicureans. Some political associations could lead to certain benefits to the individual that would help to maximize pleasure and avoid physical or mental distress.

The avoidance or freedom from hardship and fear is ideal to the Epicureans. While this avoidance or freedom could conceivably be achieved through political means it was insisted by Epicurus that involvement in politics would not release one from fear and he advised against a life of politics. Epicurus also discouraged contributing to political society by starting a family, as the benefits of a wife and children are outweighed by the trouble brought about by having a family. Instead Epicurus encouraged a formation of a community of friends outside the traditional political state. This community of virtuous friends would focus on internal affairs and justice.

However, Epicureanism is adaptable to circumstance as is the Epicurean approach to politics. The same approaches will not always work in protection from pain and fear. In some situations it will be more beneficial to have a family and in other situations it will be more beneficial to participate in politics. It is ultimately up to the Epicurean to analyze their circumstance and take whatever action befits the situation.

Points to be made, mostly in form of notes
What i might end up doing is creating an entirely new section on the Epicurean relationship to politics due to the availability of it in the material i have acquired, first i must read more, we shall see.

JW
"small note on Perception"pg.84 JW. They believe all perceptions are true, something that drew a lot of criticism from ancient philosophers."Views on politics and society including involvement"pg. 179 JW. Epicureans disagree with other philosophical traditions, namely the Stoics, Platonist's and the Aristotelian's on the topic of family, politics and the nature of justice. The Epicureans disagree because they discourage political participation, starting a family and the notion of some natural concept of justice.

pg. 180 JW. That is not a claim for Epicureanism being apolitical or believing that justice is relativistic to ones culture, actually Epicureans would see the benefits of some political association helping to maximize pleasure and avoid physical and mental distress.

This freedom from hardship and fear is ideal and can be achieved through politics but it is insisted by Epicurus that too much involvement will not release you from this fear.

also citable to page 183 is it is more in depth with friendship. Epicureans avoid traditional politics, they would instead focus on justice and politics as a community of virtuous friends.

pg. 181 JW. Epicureanism is adaptable to circumstance, the same approach wont always work in protection from pain and fear. In certain situations it will be more beneficial to have a family and in others it will also be beneficial to participate politically, thus it is up to the Epicurean to analyze their circumstance in order to act as the situation befits.

pg. 187 JW. Possible criticism of epicurus egoist definition of friendship,

"Theory of pleasure and desire, also the virtues"

DK
pg. 66-67 DK. justice is a social contract we arrive at not some transcendental form like the ones Platonist subscribe to. Justuice is not about securing peace, prosperity or general happiness, it is about insuring personal protection from pain and has to do directly with the direct effects of justice or injustice has on individuals.

CW
"Politics"pg.83 CW. To Epicureans all our social relations are a matter of how we perceive each other, no one is inherently of higher value or meant to dominate another. That is because there is no metaphysical basis for the superiority of one kind of person, all people are made of the same atomic material.

pg. 85 CW. Epicureans shunned politics because it can lead to frustrations and ambitions which can directly conflict with the epicurean pursuit for peace of mind and virtue.

Bibliography:

Epicureanism A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson 2015

ISBN: 978-0-19-968832-6

The Art of Happiness Daniel Klein 2012

ISBN: 978-0-14-310721-7

The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism James Warren 2009

ISBN: 978-0-521-87347-5

Response to peer review list:

-I completely agree with the reviewers point on the use of colorful language possibly being misleading. I will attempt to express things more clearly moving forward.

-I disagree however on whether the section i create should go into deeper detail on certain key concepts that are relevant to the overall article. Other sections will cover the pieces to the reasons provided by my section in greater detail, it might be cumbersome to readers to have the key concepts they read in prior sections awkwardly shoe horned into a section that only references that idea in passing. To be direct in the politics section i wont go into details explaining a key concept in epicurean ethic that effects epicurean politics, i will explain the effect of the key concept has on politics but the key concept itself comes from ethics and should be explained in greater detail in said section i think.

-I agree with my reviewer again on the overall structure of the page. I will attempt to restructure the section as i already had the same idea in mind. I will probably squeeze in my section after the Philosophy, History, and Ethics sections. But also restructure the article to have the Philosophy section first, as people who search up epicureanism probably want to find out what they are first. Followed by the Ethics section, as it also has to do with who they are especially in philosophy. Then the new politics section, since it's intertwined with ethics, followed by the religion and etc. since those are more detached from the actual identity of Epicureanism. I am struggling with where to put the history section as i have noticed in most articles it comes first, so i may just follow tradition and leave it as first but shuffle the immediate things under it around.