Epicurean Preconceptions

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive study of the Epicurean theory of ‘preconception’. It addresses what a preconception is; how our preconception of the gods can be called innata, innate; the role played by epibolai (active mental focusing); and how preconceptions play a semantic role different from that of ‘sayables’ in Stoicism. The paper highlights the conceptual connections between these issues, and also shows how later Epicureans develop Epicurus’ doctrine of preconceptions while remaining orthodox about the core of that doctrine.

Prolepsis

“…Two centuries after Epicurus, the Roman philosopher Cicero provided a Latin translation of prolepsis, as anticipation (anticipationem) and prenotion (praenotio), and defined this term as "a sort of preconceived mental picture of a thing, without which nothing can be understood or investigated or discussed" (p. 45). For their part, the Epicureans of the late Hellenistic and Roman period elaborated upon the original concept in different ways (Tsouna 2016). For instance, Lucretius, in his philosophical poem De Rerum Natura, translated prolepsis as notitia or notities, understood as preconception.…”

Epicurus on the false belief that sense-impressions conflict

“…For example, in the notorious passage from Cicero's De natura deorum, 1.49 which purports to explain the way in which, according to the Epicureans, we humans come to form a notion (intellegentia) of divine blessed and eternal natures, some emphasis is 6. For recent accounts of Epicurean prolepsis see Morel 2008 andTsouna 2016. Epinoia occurs also at Epicurus, Ep.Hdt.…”