Even Epicurean retreat was framed as self-change for a new world, not mere selfishness

Evidence

The Epicureans’ rebuttal might have been similar to Houriet’s: They were changing themselves first. How could accusations of selfishness be leveled on a school that taught altruism to the degree that one was expected to die for a friend? More practically, in order to build the kind of world that Epicurus wanted, he needed to close it off from the world. But his critics didn’t see it that way. Clearly the students of The Garden felt deep responsibility to one another, but responsibility to everyone else was left out of the question. They had forsaken the world. — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing, 175

Categorization

Category: Definitional Content

• XREF: The ‘changing themselves first’ defense is the historical anchor for Odell’s own version of refusal — useful for the reader distinguishing her project from simple withdrawal, and connects to Deep Listening’s self-work.
• QUESTION: Does Odell ultimately accept or complicate this ‘changing ourselves first’ defense, given the privilege critique?

Related

• Epicurus’s school admitted women, slaves, and non-Greeks free of charge (similarity 0.80)