The a rticle discusses three versions of the question of the structure of Epicurus’ philosophy. According to the fi rst version, Epicurus’ philosophical teaching consists of three parts: physics, ethics and canonics. An established tradition in the history of philosophy speaks in favor of this version. An important role in the formation of this tradition was played by such authors as Cicero, Seneca, Sextus Empiricus, Diogenes Laertius. According to the second version, Epicurus’ philosophical teaching is limited to two parts: physics and ethics. The Canonics is not considered as a separate section. It is part of physics. The basis for this version is the emphasis in the texts of Epicurus on two teachings: about nature and lifestyle. The two-part structure of epicureanism is also reported by some late Antique authors. According to the third version, the philosophical teaching of Epicurus does not have a strict division into separate parts. First of all, this is evidenced by the lack of clear statements of Epicurus about the structure of his teaching. It also follows from the texts of Epicurus that he adheres to a holistic view of philosophy, in which there is no special need to divide it into separate parts. In addition, works are attributed to Epicurus, the classifi cation of which is not reported. This may indicate a weak elaboration by Epicurus of the question of the structure of philosophical teaching. It was found that Epicurus does not share Plato’s and Aristotle’s representations about the classifi cation of sciences. Epicurus contrasts the representation of the division of sciences into theoretical, practical and productive with the opinion of the division of sciences into useful – contributing to the acquisition of serenity and useless – not contributing to the achievement of this goal. Epicurus’ disagreement with academics and peripatetics on this issue contributes to the assumption that Epicurus does not share other representations of his opponents, including the three-part structure of philosophy.