Home Philosophy Justifying without Explaining. Epicurus on enargeia
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Justifying without Explaining. Epicurus on enargeia

  • Pierre-Marie Morel
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

According to a passage in Cicero’s Academica, some philosophers considered it legitimate to justify the evidence1. This paper examines the view that Epicurus and his followers were among them. They did not claim to explain evidence, which would be contradictory since evident truth does not require any proof. However, they developed complex strategies to justify the evidence of sensations: not only, as is often said, by the physical description of sensations - which attests that they are reliable perceptions of the external world - but also by indirect and negative arguments. In particular, they used arguments by consequences. Several Epicurean texts state not only that sense-perceptions are irrefutable but also that the consequences of the opposite thesis would be disastrous for knowledge and for action. Thus, avoiding the mistake of trying to explain what is obvious, the Epicureans must be given credit for adopting a consistent theory of the criterion.

Abstract

According to a passage in Cicero’s Academica, some philosophers considered it legitimate to justify the evidence1. This paper examines the view that Epicurus and his followers were among them. They did not claim to explain evidence, which would be contradictory since evident truth does not require any proof. However, they developed complex strategies to justify the evidence of sensations: not only, as is often said, by the physical description of sensations - which attests that they are reliable perceptions of the external world - but also by indirect and negative arguments. In particular, they used arguments by consequences. Several Epicurean texts state not only that sense-perceptions are irrefutable but also that the consequences of the opposite thesis would be disastrous for knowledge and for action. Thus, avoiding the mistake of trying to explain what is obvious, the Epicureans must be given credit for adopting a consistent theory of the criterion.

Chapters in this book

  1. Frontmatter I
  2. Vorwort V
  3. Inhaltsverzeichnis VII
  4. Einleitung 1
  5. 1 Erklärungsmuster in Mythos und Religion
  6. Imaginäre Anfänge: Begründen und Erklären in aitiologischen Mythen 15
  7. Kein bloß weltlich Ding. Religiöstheologische Begründungen der Ehe im 1. Thessalonicherbrief des Paulus und in den Diatriben des Musonius Rufus 37
  8. 2 Narrative ‚Welterklärung‘ im Epos
  9. Causas memorare – causas cognoscere – causas expromere. Zu einer Poetologie der Ursachenforschung im griechischrömischen Epos 59
  10. 3 Erklärungsansätze in der antiken Historiographie
  11. Menschliches Handeln und göttliches Wirken in der christlichen Geschichtsschreibung der Spätantike 79
  12. 4 Erklärungsmodelle in der Medizin
  13. Selbsterklärende Wissenschaft – Metareflexion als Mittel zur Konstruktion medizinischer Autorität bei Galen 105
  14. 5 Begründung und Erklärung in der antiken Philosophie
  15. 5,1 Vorsokratiker
  16. ‚Herrschaft und Knechtschaft‘: Determinismus-Paradigmata bei Heraklit als Begründung und Erklärung der Welt 123
  17. 5,2 Platon
  18. Knowledge in the Theaetetus 165
  19. One over What Many? The Advantages of Forms and Nous as Aitia in the Phaedo 185
  20. Ungerechte Könige: Überlegungen zum Verhältnis von ethischen und politischen Begründungen in der antiken Philosophie 197
  21. Definition und Erklärung in Platons Sophistes 217
  22. Platons Verständnis von Notwendigkeit 237
  23. 5,3 Aristoteles
  24. Warum die Zeit ein Kontinuum ist und ein Vorher und Nachher aufweist. Weiche Begründungen bei Aristoteles 263
  25. Aristotle’s hexis-Based Epistemology: A Plea for a Virtue-Theoretical Reappraisal 283
  26. Für uns oder der Sache nach? – Zum Unterschied von Begründen und Erklären bei Aristoteles und Platon 309
  27. Explaining the Growth of Scientific Knowledge: Aristotle’s View 337
  28. Aristotle’s Four Causes: Coaction, Not Redundancy 351
  29. 5,4 Epikureismus
  30. Aristotle and Epicurus on kinesis. A New Explanatory Model of Change and Causation in Ancient Atomism 381
  31. Justifying without Explaining. Epicurus on enargeia 409
  32. 5,5 Römische Philosophie
  33. Secundum scholam disserere. Ways of Arguing according to the Different Philosophical Schools 431
  34. 5,6 Kaiserzeitlicher spätantiker Neuplatonismus
  35. The Explanation of the Myth. Plotinus on Eros 451
  36. ,Die Aufhebung der Hypothesen‘. Antike Platoniker über die ἀρχὴ ἀνυπόθετος als Prinzip der Rechtfertigung und der Erklärung 471
  37. 6 Wissenschaft und ‚Mythos‘
  38. Erzählte Wissenschaft. Zum Potential des Mythos 509
  39. Informationen zu den Autoren und Autorinnen dieses Bandes 525
  40. Stellenindex 531
  41. Sach- und Namenindex 549
Downloaded on 16.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783111414577-019/html
Scroll to top button