On Natural Community

In Epicurean discourse we often get into discussions of minimalism from the perspective of natural and necessary desires: minimalism not for the sake of frugality and simplicity, but for the sake of having a deep conviction of what is and what isn’t necessary.

The natural measure of wealth is that which corresponds to our natural and necessary desires.

Thus, in our discussions of autarchy we talk about the natural measure of wealth, and during Pride month I discussed the natural measure of Pride (many people are forced into a healthy re-assessment of their self-worth as a result of bigotry and mistreatment). In a naturalist evaluation of equality, which is a term so misused and confusing, I argued that our shared, natural limitations and needs provide the basis for a REAL, experienced equality and that, because all mortals have a universal need to feed, when we gather around the tables we can experience true communal equality.

The contributors of the Las Indias blog, a bilingual virtual community dedicated to cooperative ethics which proclaims itself proudly Epicurean, has been steadily making the case for natural community. In a recent piece, David the Ugarte makes the case for the Epicurean communal model:

Indianos takes part in an Epicurean communitarian tradition: the community is a «society» of friends. From the Epicurean point of view friendship (fraternity) and knowledge are the central goals of community itself. So, you will accept and look for people you can become friend of. But you also will put (an)other condition to them: to share basic common contexts in order to be able (to) learn together. Consequently, community is something that happens (within) a cultural and philosophical common ground, not just a set of rules open to everybody.

The link to Epicurean communitarian tradition leads to another blog entry on community and happiness. At the core of Las Indias’ communitarian doctrine we find Adlerian theories on natural community (which is smaller in scale and based on REAL interpersonal relations), as opposed to non-natural or Platonic community: artificial ideological constructs and narratives that people use to weave their identities but that do not constitute real communities or translate into real interpersonal relations. Nation-building is the prime example. There are many other imagined communities based on political strategy and ideology that also fit the Platonic definition of being artificial communities.

Notice, also, how communities of friends evolve naturally and organically. It is easier to become friends with our friends’ friends because there is already some familiarity. A recent 20-year-long study proves that happiness (and sadness) spread like a contagion, which means that even at very subtle levels we mirror behavioral and psychological patterns in our social environment. Herd instincts exist in all social entities, whether we’re aware, whether we accept this or not. The fact that the term “contagious” is used in the study, places social relations within the framework of nature, not culture.

The idea of Epicurean friendship and intimacy is that we should be invested in the happiness, self-overcoming and moral betterment of our friends (and they in ours). In light of recent research, it makes perfect sense why this is so important: unlike with patriotic narratives and imaginary communities, in natural communities the happiness of our friends has a direct, tangible, measurable effect on our own long-term wellbeing.

There’s also recent research on isolation, how it feels cold in the body, and how it’s a health risk factor that shortens one’s life span on par with obesity and smoking. People need to feel both productive and loved. If and when they don’t, their bodies and minds begin decaying. In other words, community is both natural and necessary, and (as with wealth, pride, etc.) people need at least a natural measure of community in their lives.

What to do? The wisdom tradition of the Scandinavians says it well in stanzas 43-44 of the Havamal. Call up your good and true friends and see them frequently, blend your mind with theirs, befriend their friends, never betray them, and honor them with gifts:

To his friend a man should bear him as friend,
to him and a friend of his;
but let him beware that he be not the friend
of one who is friend to his foe.

Do you have a friend whom you trust well,
from whom you crave good?
Share your mind with him, exchange gifts with him,
make efforts to find him often.

About hiramcrespo

Hiram Crespo is the author of 'Tending the Epicurean Garden' and founder of societyofepicurus.com. He's also written for The Humanist, Eidolon, Occupy, The New Humanism, The Secular Web, Europa Laica, AteístasPR, and many other outlets.
This entry was posted in Epicurus, Humanism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to On Natural Community

  1. Beautiful post Hiram!!

    Like

  2. Pingback: Lecturas interesantes del 27/01/2015

  3. Tom Merle says:

    I wonder how to reconcile these two quotes from the essay “our shared, natural limitations and needs provide the basis for a REAL, experienced equality and that, because all mortals have a universal need to feed, when we gather around the tables we can experience true communal equality.”

    and…

    “community is something that happens (within) a cultural and philosophical common ground, not just a set of rules open to everybody.”

    The first assertion seems to base equality on needs common to all humans and that therefore sitting together, across class and other conventional distinctions, for a communal meal reflects the natural validity of equality.

    Yet we must share many other qualities as the other quote asserts. If we don’t share cultural traits can we achieve a natural community?

    Like

    • hiramcrespo says:

      Yet we must share many other qualities as the other quote asserts. If we don’t share cultural traits can we achieve a natural community?

      I’ve had friends from very different cultures that I’ve met, usually in work environments, where I’ve had to work together with them. They’ve been Muslim, Christian, Atheists, and from a diversity of racial and cultural backgrounds. Also, through friends I’ve been able to meet people of other cultures who have ended up becoming my own friends. I do think it’s easier to forge natural community the more things we have in common with our friends, but I still think different kinds of experience and community can be created with different kinds of friends. When I was interviewed by Hispanic American Freethinkers for their podcast, I argued that we should have friends that are similar to us, AS WELL as friends that hold different views. We gain different things from each. Thomas Jefferson argued something similar:

      I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.” – Thomas Jefferson to William Hamilton, April 22, 1800

      Like

  4. Qué delicia de post, qué forma más bonita de expresar la fraternidad como la base de la comunidad. Me encantó!

    Like

  5. Pingback: Reasonings on the Havamal | The Autarkist

  6. Pingback: Reasonings on Community, Part I of Book Review | The Autarkist

  7. Pingback: Reasonings on Community, Part II: Community Vs. Polis | The Autarkist

  8. Pingback: Review of The Book of Community | Society of Friends of Epicurus

  9. Pingback: Trump Threatens the 14th Amendment | The Autarkist

  10. Pingback: Review of The Book of Community | Epicurean Database

  11. Pingback: Utilitarian Reasonings I | The Autarkist

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s