Letter to Pythocles

Abstract The analysis of the Letter to Pythocles first addresses the issue of its potential inauthenticity from a new perspective, drawing from Epicurean epistemology and parrhesia (frank speech) to suggest diffuse authoring within the community. Knowledge production and validation are emphasized as a collective endeavour and the equation of individual authorship with authenticity as biased. The chapter further addresses peculiar features of the letter, such as the stylistic discrepancy between the cover letter/peritext (i.e. the praefatio epitomatoris and conclusion) and the epitome proper, which may be indicative of different original (groups of) addressees. This is also reflected in the use and distribution of person deixis for the different parts. The striking repetitiveness of the methodological provisos, which emphasize the continuous need to believe the evidence offered by one’s senses, is analysed in detail and taken to indicate a non-linear use of the epitome. The letter emerges from this discussion as a string of paradigmatic and open-ended interpretations of unclear phenomena (adêla), which allow for multiple explanations and await further examination. Based on the commonality of perceptual apparatus suggested in Chapter 2, Chapter 3 also argues that others, if honest, can have a subsidiary role in offering para-evidentiary testimonies to test explanations awaiting positive confirmation or falsification. This confirms the importance of collaborative work in generating and verifying knowledge in addition to individual experience. Finally, Epicurus’ apparent confidence that all possible and valid explanations are always compatible with happiness is taken to be indicative of a rather optimistic outlook.