Epicureanism and bad behavior

Epicureanism and bad behavior

Diogenes could be the first user of robots because stories are telling that this philosopher used dogs as servants. I don't know how true this kind of story is, but the philosophy of robotics is coming from the Diogenes, and his way to use dogs as servants. They ever said "no" to the orders, what Diogenes gave, and the same philosophy is behind the robotics. Robots are loyal servants for their master, and this means that users of the robots must feel responsible, what those machines are doing. The same way the trainer of the dog must understand that misuse those skills might cause death to somebody, as well as misuse the robots causes.

Above this text is an image of Diogenes, a philosopher who used dogs as the servants. The name of the painting is Diogenes Sitting in his Tub by Jean-Léon Gérôme (1860). The story of that philosopher tells that Diogenes put the list of goods, what he wanted to buy to the mouth of those dogs, and the basket at the neck, and money to that basket. Then somebody asked what if the shopkeeper would just take money, the answer was that Diogenes would send a dog to find that shopkeeper, and then ask the reason for that thing. Or maybe those dogs were trained torpedoes, what would give bait for punishment. And that will tell that there is nothing funny with that kind of person. The nickname of this painting is "Ancient astronaut is sitting in his landed Soyuz-spacecraft".

But then we can think that there is also another explanation for that image. The idea is that those dogs are guarding Diogenes himself, and maybe that is the symbol of the students. Diogenes himself was a philosopher, but the people who he thought were not wanted to become the philosophers, they just wanted to get papers. And sometimes those persons wrote reports to the leaders of the city.

The Epicureanism in philosophy means that the philosopher is taking the problem under observation one time after one, and try to find every kind of problems and things, what is not involved in the problem, and then that person removes them. At the end of this process only thing, that is left is the problem itself.

When Epicurealist would handle the problem, that kind of philosopher removes every picture and other things, what are translated as the decorations, and then the text itself is important. The leading thought of this version of philosophy is that when we are finding every way to look at the problem, we find also things, that somebody is hiding in the problem.

And what makes a philosopher interest in some problem, is that there is a problem. The problem itself makes a philosopher curious, and by asking a couple of questions the problem itself tells, why that kind of problem is a problem, what is told to people. If there is a price like a princess and half empire about solving that kind of problem, there must be something big behind that kind of problem, because nobody promises that kind of price for nothing.

So one of the most important questions about the problem is, who or what benefits about that thing? What something would bring for mankind or some group of people? This is the way how investigators are thinking, or they should think. They want to find the smallest part, what they cannot section anymore, and then those people find the nucleus of the idea.

The idea of the philosophical discussions is not that somebody will win the "epic rap battle of philosophers". That thing is not important. The important thing is how the person creates the opinion, and what are the things, that is caused the forming of the opinion is in an important role in that thing. And the main idea is to introduce the process, which is behind the opinion.

In this part of the text, we must remember that Socrates was not the first philosopher in Greece. He was the product of the long and rich road of Hellenistic philosophers. That means that somebody taught Socrates. So when we are thinking about the problems with that man, and the famous death penalty, was that happen, because he asked questions, what was embarrassing.

Maybe Socrates criticized the predestination of the Greek religion. If Socrates got an idea, that people can rise in the social hierarchy by using own will and skills, which means that the person turned to treat for the leaders of ancient Greece. Or he might ask only "who is the person, who gets a benefit from some tradition"? Or is there some other reason, why that kind of thing is so holy? Many philosophers ever wrote a single word. They are known from the texts, what their students are written.

When we are thinking about the Epicureans and their bad behavior, what they thought as the virtue, we must realize, that the bad behavior and dirt protected those people, because of the plagiarism and informants were always following philosophers. That means that many philosophers wanted to be unknown during their lifetime.

Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Jean-L%C3%A9on_G%C3%A9r%C3%B4me_-_Diogenes_-_Walters_37131.jpg