quest


I am a woman of 64 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:
marulaki@hotmail.com


The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.


Friday, January 18, 2013

635. A Male Misrepresentation Of Epicurus' Philosophy

635.   A Male Misrepresentation Of Epicurus' Philosophy

I have been watching a video containing a male interpretation of Epicurus' philosophy.   (I am not giving the link, as I do not want to propagate any expression of sexism.)

The author is talking about the wisdom of considering before acting, what price in pain has to be paid as the consequence of indulging in pleasure.  Unfortunately he presents (or rather misrepresents) it as an entirely selfish and self-centered balancing with the limited consideration for only the own person, without any reference to avoiding the pain done to others.   
Basically this guy claims, that if someone expects to get more pleasure than pain for himself, then there is no reason to refrain from any indulgence, even when this includes the abuse of women's bodies.

He talks about a man's decision to have sex or not the same way as if he were talking about his decision to use a car or not.   He implicitly considers women as utilities, not as human beings deserving consideration, respect and to be spared pain.
By his interpretation, even Genghis Khan would have behaved in accordance with Epicurus.   Genghis Khan had the power to get away with raping thousands of women without himself suffering bad consequences.

As a woman, I am appalled by the author's very selfish, irresponsible and inconsiderate attitude, which he shows implicitly by some of his examples.   He misleads people to think that the objectification of women were in accordance with Epicurus.

One of the core statements of the Epicurean philosophy is "neither to harm nor be harmed".    This responsible perspective towards others is even mentioned first.

Based upon this, the correct application of the balancing of pain and pleasure includes the consideration and responsibility to avoid hurting and harming others and to restrict indulgence in any pleasure to when there are no suffering victims.