Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fytakis, Kyriakos
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024
Resumo: Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.
id UERN-3_4f5f8fe6b0dd425ad25d29b16965af5a
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs2.periodicos.apps.uern.br:article/5024
network_acronym_str UERN-3
network_name_str Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinozaClinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism:: The figure of SpinozaclinamenEpicureanismLucretiusmodal metaphysicsnecessitySpinozaclinamenEpicurismoLucréciometafísica modalnecessidadeEspinosaEarly modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN2023-08-04info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/502410.25244/tf.v15i2.5024Trilhas Filosóficas; v. 15 n. 2 (2022): Trilhas Filosóficas: Dossiê Epicurismo antigo e sua recepção (v.15, n.2, 2022) ; 169-1811984-556110.25244/tf.v15i2reponame:Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)instacron:UERNenghttps://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024/3898Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakishttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Fytakis, Kyriakos2023-09-11T15:28:29Zoai:ojs2.periodicos.apps.uern.br:article/5024Revistahttp://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/indexPUBhttp://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/oaitrilhasfilosoficas@uern.br || marcos_erico@yahoo.com.br10.25244/tf1984-55611982-7490opendoar:2023-09-11T15:28:29Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism:: The figure of Spinoza
title Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
spellingShingle Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
Fytakis, Kyriakos
clinamen
Epicureanism
Lucretius
modal metaphysics
necessity
Spinoza
clinamen
Epicurismo
Lucrécio
metafísica modal
necessidade
Espinosa
title_short Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
title_full Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
title_fullStr Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
title_full_unstemmed Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
title_sort Clinamen, necessity and modern receptions of epicureanism: : the figure of spinoza
author Fytakis, Kyriakos
author_facet Fytakis, Kyriakos
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Fytakis, Kyriakos
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv clinamen
Epicureanism
Lucretius
modal metaphysics
necessity
Spinoza
clinamen
Epicurismo
Lucrécio
metafísica modal
necessidade
Espinosa
topic clinamen
Epicureanism
Lucretius
modal metaphysics
necessity
Spinoza
clinamen
Epicurismo
Lucrécio
metafísica modal
necessidade
Espinosa
description Early modern readings of Epicureanism carried various prejudices and the term epicurean often designated an impious and potentially dangerous thinker. This was the case for Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza whose contemporaries compared his doctrine to Epicureanism on several occasions. However, how accurate would it be to affirm that Spinoza’s philosophy belongs to the neo-epicurean tradition? We find such a comparison in many 17th and 18th century texts, especially in works written by critics of his thought, such as François Fénelon or Jean La Placette. Epicurean doctrine on chance was compared to Spinoza’s theory on necessity, but despite the prejudices of the comparison, both Epicurus’s and Spinoza’s philosophies had an important influence on the Enlightenment, namely on French materialists. In our paper, we proceed to an analysis of this comparison and shed light on one of the most influential receptions of Epicurus’s philosophy in modernity. In this perspective, we show their inherent relation and focus more particularly on their modal theories; we thus examine the reasons why- contrary to other cases- the comparison was based less on ethical and mostly on metaphysical matters and we show at what extent it is legitimate.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-08-04
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024
10.25244/tf.v15i2.5024
url https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024
identifier_str_mv 10.25244/tf.v15i2.5024
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.apps.uern.br/index.php/RTF/article/view/5024/3898
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakis
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Kyriakos Fytakis
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte - UERN
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Trilhas Filosóficas; v. 15 n. 2 (2022): Trilhas Filosóficas: Dossiê Epicurismo antigo e sua recepção (v.15, n.2, 2022) ; 169-181
1984-5561
10.25244/tf.v15i2
reponame:Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)
instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)
instacron:UERN
instname_str Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)
instacron_str UERN
institution UERN
reponame_str Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)
collection Trilhas Filosóficas (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Trilhas Filosóficas (Online) - Universidade do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte (UERN)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv trilhasfilosoficas@uern.br || marcos_erico@yahoo.com.br
_version_ 1797240256182878208