Episode 240 - Cicero's On The Nature of The Gods - Part 15 - The False Allegation That "General Assent" Was The Epicurean Basis For Divinity
-
- Prolepsis and the Basis of Belief in Gods: Cotta critiques Velleius’s argument by suggesting that the belief in gods arises from the general assent of people. However, Epicurus posits that the belief in gods is rooted in prolepsis, a pre-rational perception equivalent to the senses, allowing humans to recognize gods as a class of entities to be examined. This faculty, unlike constructed opinions, provides the foundation for discussing gods, distinct from the specific gods worshipped by different cultures.
- Cotta’s Misinterpretation of Epicurean Theology: Cotta argues that Epicurus claims the existence of gods is based on widespread belief, misrepresenting Epicurus’s position. Epicurus asserts that knowledge of gods stems from prolepsis, not from human consensus, and any particular notion of a god is an opinion subject to scrutiny. Epicurus maintains that the notion of gods as blessed and immortal is derived from innate perception rather than popular belief, challenging Cotta’s accusations.
- Academic Skepticism and Its Limitations: Cotta’s skepticism undermines his arguments against Epicureanism by denying any certain knowledge while asserting the falsity of specific claims. This inconsistency highlights the problematic nature of using skepticism to refute Epicurus, as Cotta fails to substantiate his position while criticizing Epicurean assertions. The discussion reveals the philosophical tension between skepticism and the need for a coherent alternative framework.
- Epicurean Critique of Supernatural Deities: Epicurus rejects traditional notions of gods as creators and overseers, emphasizing natural explanations consistent with physics. He distinguishes between common misconceptions and the philosophical understanding of gods as non-interventionist, blessed, and imperishable. This perspective challenges the prevailing orthodoxy of divine intervention and underlines the importance of a rational approach to theology.
- Cicero’s Contradictory Stance on Philosophy and Belief: The text reveals Cicero’s inconsistent treatment of philosophical issues, oscillating between skepticism and an acceptance of comforting beliefs like the afterlife. Cicero’s critiques of Epicureanism reflect a selective approach to philosophy, prioritizing emotional comfort over truth-seeking. This inconsistency contrasts with Epicurus’s commitment to understanding the nature of gods and the universe through evidence and reason.
- Prolepsis and the Basis of Belief in Gods: Cotta critiques Velleius’s argument by suggesting that the belief in gods arises from the general assent of people. However, Epicurus posits that the belief in gods is rooted in prolepsis, a pre-rational perception equivalent to the senses, allowing humans to recognize gods as a class of entities to be examined. This faculty, unlike constructed opinions, provides the foundation for discussing gods, distinct from the specific gods worshipped by different cultures.