Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
User avatar
damadeelche
New Trial Member
Posts: 1
Joined: December 2nd, 2019, 7:47 pm

Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by damadeelche » December 2nd, 2019, 7:59 pm

Hi, My name is Elche. I am preparing a term paper and going to compare two philosophy: Epicureanism and Buddhism. My thesis statement will be as follow: Capital doctrines of Epicureanism and Buddhism are the same but because of conceptual differences they are two different philosophy. I will argue that four doctrines of them are the same but because of the definition of happiness the argument will be valid but not sound. there is going to be 4 premises and one conclusion. What do you think about my thesis statement? Can you give me a feedback if the argument make sense? Thank you very much.

User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3106
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by Felix » December 3rd, 2019, 6:20 pm

I don't see a correspondence between the two, in fact their ends are practically antithetical. The focus of Epicureanism is on attaining earthly happiness and contentment while Buddhism seeks liberation from the bondage of temporal pleasures (and suffering).
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1121
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by h_k_s » December 12th, 2019, 10:22 pm

damadeelche wrote:
December 2nd, 2019, 7:59 pm
Hi, My name is Elche. I am preparing a term paper and going to compare two philosophy: Epicureanism and Buddhism. My thesis statement will be as follow: Capital doctrines of Epicureanism and Buddhism are the same but because of conceptual differences they are two different philosophy. I will argue that four doctrines of them are the same but because of the definition of happiness the argument will be valid but not sound. there is going to be 4 premises and one conclusion. What do you think about my thesis statement? Can you give me a feedback if the argument make sense? Thank you very much.
Pray tell, what are the 4 ??

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1121
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by h_k_s » December 12th, 2019, 10:35 pm

Buddhism is more closely related to Stoicism than to its complete counterpart, which is Epicureanism.

Epicureanism and Stoicism are complete opposites.

I like the 5 prohibited professions of Buddhism:

1 - Slave trading;

2 - Gun and gunpowder dealing;

3 - Alcohol production and sales;

4 - Poisons manufacturing and selling;

5 - Slaughtering animals and butchering meats.

#1 now mostly manifests itself in prostitution and white slavery today.

#2 is a necessary evil, but should be regulated somehow in terms of preventing criminals and the mentally ill from obtaining guns and ammo.

#3 and #4 are largely the same. It takes time for alcoholics to realize they are alcoholics and are poisoning themselves.

#5 is an animal rights issue about eating meats. Slaughtering on a macro scale is the insidious side of meat production -- the chickens, lambs, pigs, and steers all suffer. I have no problem with butchering and rather enjoy doing it myself with squirrels, pheasants, rabbits, antelopes, deer, and elk. But in that case, the animal is surprised by the hunter's bullet, never knows what hit it, dies before it falls to the ground, and this is a much more painless death than being hit by a car. One elk or two deer will last me an entire year. A rabbit or pheasant is 2 meals. A squirrel one. I like to vary my diet. Fish and seafood are guilt free for me.

The essence of Buddhism is "a lite footprint on the Earth."

The essence of Stoicism is self denial.

The essence of Epicureanism is gluttony.

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1121
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by h_k_s » December 12th, 2019, 10:36 pm

Felix wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 6:20 pm
I don't see a correspondence between the two, in fact their ends are practically antithetical. The focus of Epicureanism is on attaining earthly happiness and contentment while Buddhism seeks liberation from the bondage of temporal pleasures (and suffering).
Exactly !!

What a very good philosopher you are you are !!

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 4201
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by LuckyR » December 17th, 2019, 9:31 am

h_k_s wrote:
December 12th, 2019, 10:35 pm
Buddhism is more closely related to Stoicism than to its complete counterpart, which is Epicureanism.

Epicureanism and Stoicism are complete opposites.

I like the 5 prohibited professions of Buddhism:

1 - Slave trading;

2 - Gun and gunpowder dealing;

3 - Alcohol production and sales;

4 - Poisons manufacturing and selling;

5 - Slaughtering animals and butchering meats.

#1 now mostly manifests itself in prostitution and white slavery today.

#2 is a necessary evil, but should be regulated somehow in terms of preventing criminals and the mentally ill from obtaining guns and ammo.

#3 and #4 are largely the same. It takes time for alcoholics to realize they are alcoholics and are poisoning themselves.

#5 is an animal rights issue about eating meats. Slaughtering on a macro scale is the insidious side of meat production -- the chickens, lambs, pigs, and steers all suffer. I have no problem with butchering and rather enjoy doing it myself with squirrels, pheasants, rabbits, antelopes, deer, and elk. But in that case, the animal is surprised by the hunter's bullet, never knows what hit it, dies before it falls to the ground, and this is a much more painless death than being hit by a car. One elk or two deer will last me an entire year. A rabbit or pheasant is 2 meals. A squirrel one. I like to vary my diet. Fish and seafood are guilt free for me.

The essence of Buddhism is "a lite footprint on the Earth."

The essence of Stoicism is self denial.

The essence of Epicureanism is gluttony.
You must be an extraordinary shot! Trust me, your skills are not common. Hunting is not dramatically different from ranching at the very end of the process.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1121
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by h_k_s » December 17th, 2019, 2:05 pm

LuckyR wrote:
December 17th, 2019, 9:31 am
h_k_s wrote:
December 12th, 2019, 10:35 pm
Buddhism is more closely related to Stoicism than to its complete counterpart, which is Epicureanism.

Epicureanism and Stoicism are complete opposites.

I like the 5 prohibited professions of Buddhism:

1 - Slave trading;

2 - Gun and gunpowder dealing;

3 - Alcohol production and sales;

4 - Poisons manufacturing and selling;

5 - Slaughtering animals and butchering meats.

#1 now mostly manifests itself in prostitution and white slavery today.

#2 is a necessary evil, but should be regulated somehow in terms of preventing criminals and the mentally ill from obtaining guns and ammo.

#3 and #4 are largely the same. It takes time for alcoholics to realize they are alcoholics and are poisoning themselves.

#5 is an animal rights issue about eating meats. Slaughtering on a macro scale is the insidious side of meat production -- the chickens, lambs, pigs, and steers all suffer. I have no problem with butchering and rather enjoy doing it myself with squirrels, pheasants, rabbits, antelopes, deer, and elk. But in that case, the animal is surprised by the hunter's bullet, never knows what hit it, dies before it falls to the ground, and this is a much more painless death than being hit by a car. One elk or two deer will last me an entire year. A rabbit or pheasant is 2 meals. A squirrel one. I like to vary my diet. Fish and seafood are guilt free for me.

The essence of Buddhism is "a lite footprint on the Earth."

The essence of Stoicism is self denial.

The essence of Epicureanism is gluttony.
You must be an extraordinary shot! Trust me, your skills are not common. Hunting is not dramatically different from ranching at the very end of the process.
I have/use a really heavy Canadian magnum rifle, the kind that will kill anything in Canada, including any/all of their bears. It's called a 300 RUM.

It is really uncomfortable to shoot it, and it requires a special shoulder pad that you strap to your chest which you can order from Sportsmen's Warehouse.

The weight of the bullet and the high muzzle velocity and resulting bullet energy and hydrostatic shock are normally enough not only to kill the animal instantly but also to nearly gut it with one shot. I like 200 grain bullets for big game. Any factory brand will do. Not too expensive but not cheap either.

For militia and sniper applications in case China or Mexico ever invades us (don't laught -- Japan could have if they had wanted to right after their attack on Pearl Harbor)), I like 150 grain bullets. These are special-ordered online for 1/4 m.o.a. precision. Very expensive.

1/4 m.o.a. is a 1/4" spread at 100 yds.
1/2" at 200 yds.
1" at 400 yds.
2" at 800 yds.
4" at 1600 yds (about 1 mile or 2 kms).

And I'm USMC trained to shoot. One shot one kill. Or as we used to say back in the day, one bullet one bad guy.

As Yamamoto said, a gun behind every blade of grass, both in the USA and in Canada. Same is also true of Switzerland and Serbia.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 4201
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by LuckyR » December 17th, 2019, 6:48 pm

h_k_s wrote:
December 17th, 2019, 2:05 pm
LuckyR wrote:
December 17th, 2019, 9:31 am


You must be an extraordinary shot! Trust me, your skills are not common. Hunting is not dramatically different from ranching at the very end of the process.
I have/use a really heavy Canadian magnum rifle, the kind that will kill anything in Canada, including any/all of their bears. It's called a 300 RUM.

It is really uncomfortable to shoot it, and it requires a special shoulder pad that you strap to your chest which you can order from Sportsmen's Warehouse.

The weight of the bullet and the high muzzle velocity and resulting bullet energy and hydrostatic shock are normally enough not only to kill the animal instantly but also to nearly gut it with one shot. I like 200 grain bullets for big game. Any factory brand will do. Not too expensive but not cheap either.

For militia and sniper applications in case China or Mexico ever invades us (don't laught -- Japan could have if they had wanted to right after their attack on Pearl Harbor)), I like 150 grain bullets. These are special-ordered online for 1/4 m.o.a. precision. Very expensive.

1/4 m.o.a. is a 1/4" spread at 100 yds.
1/2" at 200 yds.
1" at 400 yds.
2" at 800 yds.
4" at 1600 yds (about 1 mile or 2 kms).

And I'm USMC trained to shoot. One shot one kill. Or as we used to say back in the day, one bullet one bad guy.

As Yamamoto said, a gun behind every blade of grass, both in the USA and in Canada. Same is also true of Switzerland and Serbia.
Exactly my point. The percentage of total hunters that are USMC sharpshooters brandishing magnum rifles are what? 1-2% of hunters? As you know the debate in the hunting community is whether to wait up to an hour before tracking wounded game. A far cry from dead before they hit the ground.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1121
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Tetrapharmakos versus Four Noble Truths

Post by h_k_s » December 18th, 2019, 9:02 pm

LuckyR wrote:
December 17th, 2019, 6:48 pm
h_k_s wrote:
December 17th, 2019, 2:05 pm


I have/use a really heavy Canadian magnum rifle, the kind that will kill anything in Canada, including any/all of their bears. It's called a 300 RUM.

It is really uncomfortable to shoot it, and it requires a special shoulder pad that you strap to your chest which you can order from Sportsmen's Warehouse.

The weight of the bullet and the high muzzle velocity and resulting bullet energy and hydrostatic shock are normally enough not only to kill the animal instantly but also to nearly gut it with one shot. I like 200 grain bullets for big game. Any factory brand will do. Not too expensive but not cheap either.

For militia and sniper applications in case China or Mexico ever invades us (don't laught -- Japan could have if they had wanted to right after their attack on Pearl Harbor)), I like 150 grain bullets. These are special-ordered online for 1/4 m.o.a. precision. Very expensive.

1/4 m.o.a. is a 1/4" spread at 100 yds.
1/2" at 200 yds.
1" at 400 yds.
2" at 800 yds.
4" at 1600 yds (about 1 mile or 2 kms).

And I'm USMC trained to shoot. One shot one kill. Or as we used to say back in the day, one bullet one bad guy.

As Yamamoto said, a gun behind every blade of grass, both in the USA and in Canada. Same is also true of Switzerland and Serbia.
Exactly my point. The percentage of total hunters that are USMC sharpshooters brandishing magnum rifles are what? 1-2% of hunters? As you know the debate in the hunting community is whether to wait up to an hour before tracking wounded game. A far cry from dead before they hit the ground.
For bowhunting, I do wait before I start to track, indeed.

But with a Canadian magnum rifle, there is no need to wait.

Post Reply