The paper focuses on Epicurus' conception about procreation and parental love toward offspring, and offers a fresh analysis of evidence, with special attention to Demetrius Lacon's testimony from PHerc. 1012 (coll. LXVI-LXVIII) and Epictetus' passage I 23, 1-5. Epicurus' opinion that parental love is not a natural attitude was debated and attacked by other schools but also debated inside the Garden. Particularly controversial appears the role played by the notion of necessity in both Demetrius and Epictetus. The latter seems to attribute to Epicurus the opinion that the cure of children, once they are born, is no longer up to us whereas Demetrius claims that philostorgia is not 'by nature' because it is a spontaneous feeling, not imposed by nature. Demetrius' aim was to defend Epicurus by not only other schools' attack but also some misinterpretation caused by compendiary or exegetical literature.
Teknopoia e amore parentale in Epicuro e nell'Epicureismo
Alesse F
2011
Abstract
The paper focuses on Epicurus' conception about procreation and parental love toward offspring, and offers a fresh analysis of evidence, with special attention to Demetrius Lacon's testimony from PHerc. 1012 (coll. LXVI-LXVIII) and Epictetus' passage I 23, 1-5. Epicurus' opinion that parental love is not a natural attitude was debated and attacked by other schools but also debated inside the Garden. Particularly controversial appears the role played by the notion of necessity in both Demetrius and Epictetus. The latter seems to attribute to Epicurus the opinion that the cure of children, once they are born, is no longer up to us whereas Demetrius claims that philostorgia is not 'by nature' because it is a spontaneous feeling, not imposed by nature. Demetrius' aim was to defend Epicurus by not only other schools' attack but also some misinterpretation caused by compendiary or exegetical literature.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
