424. Would Epicurus Today Be Childfree?
I have already been expressing my personal opinion, that people with an Epicurean brain are especially well suited to get bonded in monogamous long-term commitment, no matter if legally married or in any other form. I consider persons as having an Epicurean brain, if they are guided predominantly by rationality and less by instinctive needs for any kind of homeostasis, and if they are more sensitive, perceptive and responsive to emotional and intellectual stimulation of the pleasure center and less to physical stimulation.
But according to learned scholars' disagreement about how to interpret, what has been preserved of Epicurus' original writings, he was either completely opposed to marriage or he accepted marriage as acceptable, when the circumstances were appropriate.
I claim, that if Epicurus would live today, he would be in favor of committed couples as the best way to a happy life. I can even imagine Epicurus today as a happy member of the childfree movement.
I attribute his reluctance or opposition to marriage directly to his principle of doing no harm as a primary guidance for behavior.
I have already been expressing my personal opinion, that people with an Epicurean brain are especially well suited to get bonded in monogamous long-term commitment, no matter if legally married or in any other form. I consider persons as having an Epicurean brain, if they are guided predominantly by rationality and less by instinctive needs for any kind of homeostasis, and if they are more sensitive, perceptive and responsive to emotional and intellectual stimulation of the pleasure center and less to physical stimulation.
But according to learned scholars' disagreement about how to interpret, what has been preserved of Epicurus' original writings, he was either completely opposed to marriage or he accepted marriage as acceptable, when the circumstances were appropriate.
I claim, that if Epicurus would live today, he would be in favor of committed couples as the best way to a happy life. I can even imagine Epicurus today as a happy member of the childfree movement.
I attribute his reluctance or opposition to marriage directly to his principle of doing no harm as a primary guidance for behavior.
Pregnancy, childbirth and raising children cause a lot of pain to a woman. Today, women who choose to have children, do this as a consequence of an urge to reduce dishomeostasis due to a strong instinctive urge to procreate. They suffer, but they subjectively get a benefit from their pain. But because of the progress of medicine it is their own choice, not a consequence of being involved in any kind of a relationship.
In the times of Epicurus, the medical knowledge was much less advanced than today, and giving birth, having an abortion and using the then available rudimentary methods of attempted birth control, were all very dangerous and painful for a woman's life and health. This suffering was not a choice, it was the inevitable and automatic consequence of marriage. Marriage meant for a woman the risk of being harmed and for a man the risk of doing harm.
It is somehow very logical, that Epicurus wanting to avoid harming any woman, was aware of the serious responsibility, had he caused the pregnancy of a woman, even in the case, that she were willing to procreate. Even then, with enough empathy, Epicurus would probably still have felt guilty of the suffering of the woman.
His choice to suggest reluctance towards marriage was the only available method of being responsible and considerate.
