Hermarchus’ treatise Against Empedocles and the dispute of the Epicureans and the Stoics on the origin of morality

Abstract

The article analyzes the theory of the origin of morality, presented by the Epicurean Hermarchus in his treatise “Against Empedocles” (Porph. De abstin. I, 7–12). The author expresses doubt on the established point of view that Hermarchus, in criticizing Empedocles, actually meant to criticize the philosophical schools of his day, and did not polemicize with the Pythagoreans and the followers of Empedocles, but with the Stoics, whom he did not name, but had in mind. Exploring the Peripatetic and Epicurean tradition of using terms close to the concept of oikeiōsis, which was introduced by Hermarchus to explain the prohibition of killing a person by another person, the author of the article expresses the opinion that Stoic Chrysippus, criticizing the teaching of the Epicureans about the aspiration for pleasure as a person’s primary impulse in his essay “On the ultimate goal”, used this Epicurean term in his theory of the origin of morality (Diog. Laert. VII, 85). Such an “interception” or reinterpretation of concepts was a fairly common device used by the Stoics in a polemic against Epicureanism. Hermarchus, unlike the Stoics, who understood oikeiōsis exclusively in the context of the emergence of individual self-awareness and feelings of self-preservation, spoke about the social meaning of oikeiōsis, which described people’s perception of each other within the human community and shows the impossibility of such an attitude towards living beings outside this community (to animals). Later, the term oikeiōsis was considered to be Stoic, and its creation was attributed to Zeno.