Epicurus and Luddism
Would we be happier without technology?
Epicurus does not take any clear stance on technology. But his system suggests that reducing one’s desires is preferable to fulfilling them because then one can achieve happiness without eternally chasing material goods. Technology, at least in the way that it is deployed in capitalism (based on planned obsolescence) contradicts the essential simplicity of the ideal Epicurean life. Epicurus would likely have sympathised with Luddism.
This article is part of The Ultimate Guide to Epicurus.
If you like reading about philosophy, here's a free, weekly newsletter with articles just like this one: Send it to me!
Epicurus suggests that one could be happier by reducing one’s desires rather than fulfilling them. For him, fulfilling one’s desires only leads to further desires, while learning to desire things that are both natural and easy to obtain is the way to long-lasting happiness.
Of course, one may ask how this would work in today’s world. What is a natural desire? The desire for natural food, perhaps? Or the desire for clean water and air? Epicurus thinks that these desires are easy to fulfil just because they are natural. It is the vain desires that are hard to satisfy (for instance, the desire for an expensive handbag). But is this still true? And is Epicurus in favour of Luddism?
If Epicurus had a look around a modern supermarket, he might be surprised. Some vain desires are extremely easy to satisfy nowadays. Beer costs almost nothing. Junk food is cheap. Sweets are cheap, as are Chinese soup noodles. But what about organic fruit and vegetables? Clean water (from Tibet or France), packaged in little bottles? These are the costly, luxury items. Obesity, in our societies, is a marker of poverty. Highly processed, high-sugar foods are the staple of the poor and the unprivileged, while organic kale smoothies are the lunch of the well-off. Today, only the wealthy can afford natural apples and pesticide-free lettuce, only they can nibble at a carrot on the terrace of the country club. The poor have to make do with dirty water and roadside pollution, while the rich can afford to move out to greener pastures and breathe what Epicurus would have thought of as the ultimate natural good: clean air.
The Ultimate Guide to the Philosophy of Erich Fromm
A comprehensive overview of Erich Fromm’s philosophy of happiness. We discuss his life, his ideas and his main works, both in their historical context and how they are still relevant for us today.
Luddism (or neo-Luddism) is the idea that technology is bad, something to be avoided. In the 19th century, British textile workers opposed the introduction of machines in cloth production, because they feared that they would lose their jobs to the machines. Which is exactly what happened. Neo-Luddites are people who, for a variety of reasons, think that we would be better off with less technology, or none at all. Would Epicurus himself be a Luddite?
Epicurus: Principal Doctrines. If you'd like to have a go at reading Epicurus, here are the Principal Doctrines in a handy paperback edition.
Amazon affiliate link. If you buy through this link, Daily Philosophy will get a small commission at no cost to you. Thanks!
Epicureanism and Luddism are related. For instance, Epicurus would say that we should avoid pleasures that bring annoyances with them that are more severe than the pleasure itself. Often, these pleasures are technological products. Take a mobile phone. Of course, it is kind of convenient to have one, but, honestly, is it worth it? Take into account the cost of the phone itself, the fact that you have to replace it every two years or so, the cost of the contract, the necessity of daily charging, and the anguish and frustration if something goes wrong – if the phone is lost or hacked, or malfunctioning. After all, thirty years ago we accomplished all the same things we can today, without a single mobile phone. We had the same successes, relations with others, pastimes and hobbies, but we didn’t have all the annoyances that mobile phones cause. And perhaps this can be said of many technologies.
Planned obsolescence is the practice of creating technological artefacts that will be superseded by new ones after only a short lifespan. While in old times a steam locomotive might have a life of decades, and telephones were devices that one kept for decades, an iPhone is declared “dangerous” by Apple after only 5 years. There is no good reason for that – Apple could easily provide updates for its old phones, but it lacks incentive. Why not force the consumer to buy a new phone instead? Both Epicurus and Luddites would find a lot to criticise at this approach, not to mention the immense environmental damage caused by this use of our technologies.
Is, then, Epicurus against all technology? Would Epicurus promote Luddism? Probably not. Some technologies seem to satisfy our natural (rather than vain) desires. For example, painkillers. Or tooth fillings, glasses, surgery, antibiotics. All these can become necessary for life in some circumstances, and their absence could cause pain or even death. Perhaps warm water in the house would also count as something we naturally desire, especially in cold countries.
But what about a computer? Many modern job descriptions require one to use computers. Is then the wish to use a computer a natural or vain desire? On the one hand, I need it for my job, which means, I need it for my income, I need it to survive. On the other hand, there is no doubt that almost any job can be done equally well without a computer, as indeed people used to work up to the 1980s.
And what if a computer allows me to work from home, and thus be close to my family all day (a natural desire, it seems)? If we didn’t have computers, I’d have to leave home and work in an office, perhaps like poor Bob Cratchit in Dickens' Christmas Carol. In comparison, the annoyances a computer causes seem minor, especially if my company’s IT department takes care of it when it breaks.
Epicurus: Principal Doctrines and Letter to Menoeceus (Greek and English). This edition contains the Greek text. If you can read a bit of Greek, you can read that along with the translation.
Amazon affiliate link. If you buy through this link, Daily Philosophy will get a small commission at no cost to you. Thanks!
So would Epicurus be able to find peace and to accept technology, at least sometimes? Or is there just a deeper problem? Some of the issues are out of the control of normal men. For instance, an employee cannot normally request to work without a computer. The decision has been made for him. A poor family, supported by overworked parents, cannot always avoid eating fast food, or living in social housing, without access to nature, close to a polluting crossroads. For these people, the natural satisfaction of their natural desires is as far out of reach as the parks and quiet lawns of the Jockey Club.
Erich Fromm: Society, Technology and Progress
According to philosopher Erich Fromm, the dream of endless technological development has led to a depletion of natural resources and the destruction of nature.
Epicurus, often misunderstood, invites us not only to look at our individual desires, but also to question the whole fabric of our social reality: a reality that sometimes makes the most natural desires seem vain and out of reach for an increasingly large number of people. Our world is arranged for us by a system that profits from making the most natural of goods expensive and inaccessible.
And it is our decision to accept that, or to force this system to change.
Return to The Ultimate Guide to Epicurus.
Thanks for reading! Do you agree with Epicurus that technology does not make happy? Leave a comment!
