Assistant to the money
Well and beautifully divided the great teacher about the bliss of Epicure human needs into three categories.
First, in the natural and the unruly: these are those that, when unsatisfied, cause pain – here, therefore, are only victus et amictus [food and clothing].
Secondly, in the natural, but not unnatural: this is the need to satisfy the sexual momentum, although Epicurus – according to his diogenesis report by Diogenes Lazerio – does not express it explicitly, his teaching, by the way, modified and polished – or this need is already more difficult to meet than the ones mentioned earlier.
Thirdly, in neither natural nor unruly: it is the needs of luxury, abundance, demonstration and grandeur – these are not over, or their satisfaction is very difficult.
The boundaries of our reasonable desires to acquire are difficult, if not impossible, to be determined, since the satisfaction of each person in this respect depends not on an absolute but a relative magnitude on the relation of the requirements his or her property, so that this or the latter, considered as individual, is as meaningless as the numerator of a fraction without the denominator. A person does not at all lack the goods for which he has not even gone through the mind or the right to acquire them, others are, without them, totally satisfied. Another, on the contrary, whoever holds hundreds of times more than him, feels unhappy because he lacks a single good that he has the right to possess.
Everyone has, and from her also the viewpoint, his own horizon of what is potentially feasible for him, and his claims extend to the limits of his horizon. Whenever an object within its horizon is presented in such a way as to hope it will acquire it, then it feels happy • unhappy; on the contrary, it feels whenever difficulties appear to deprive it of this prospect. That it is outside this field of vision has no effect on it. Therefore, the great wealth of the rich does not cause concern to the poor; and, on the other hand, the rich, when he fails in his pursuits, finds no consolation in most of his possessions.
The fact that, after the loss of wealth or prosperity, and as soon as the initial pain is overcome, our usual mood is not very different from the pre-loss is because, after destroying the factor of our property, we now reduce ourselves drastically the factor of our claims. This adjustment is really painful in the case of a plight – but when it is finished, then the pain subsides, until it stops being felt: the wound heals.)
In the case, incidentally, of a happy event, the compressor of our claims is shifted to a higher point, so that our own claims swell: this is precisely the joy. However, this does not last longer than the process of completing this adjustment until we become accustomed to the increased degree of claims and become indifferent to the size of the property that corresponds to it. This is already stated in Homer’s passage, S, 136-137, which concludes as follows:
who are in the law of immense men, who are men of God, father of men
(why it suits mortals or thinking by day as it sends the gods and people the father)
The source of the dissatisfaction we feel is in our constantly renewed effort to raise the factor of our claims while the other factor remains unchanged, thus canceling our effort.
People are often criticized for reproaching that their desire is mainly driven by money and that they love it more than anything else. However, it is natural, indeed, obviously inevitable, to love money, which, while unshakable Proteas, is at all times ready to transform into the subject of our changing demands and our diverse needs.
Every other good satisfies only one desire, one need only: food is good only for the hungry, the wine only for the healthy, the only medicines for the patient, the fur only for the winter, the women only for the youth, etc .; All these are therefore merely goods for what, goods, ie in relation to something else.
Only money is the good in the absolute sense, as it does not correspond to a need in concrete, but to the necessity altogether, in abstracto.