Lucretius's moral philosophy as it appears in the formal similarities between Milton and Lucretius.

John Milton's Paradise Lost engages the argument advanced by the Roman poet Titus Lucretius Carus in his De Rerum Natura, a poetic apology for Epicureanism. Milton's Protestant views set him at odds with Lucretius's central claims: that the soul is annihilated at death and that fear of higher powers should be avoided. However, the two poets employ a number of similar devices in the service of their differing aims. Both seek to advance a doctrine through the medium of poetry, and both employ the epideictic rhetorical method of praising desirable behavior and blaming undesirable behavior. Finally, both selectively engage natural philosophy as needed to support their religious claims. The fundamental difference between Milton and Lucretius is that Milton's telos is farther-reaching: Lucretius wishes to maximize the amount of pleasure readers experience in their earthly lives, but Milton aims at readers' subjection of earthly pursuits to service of the Christian God.

Name thesis:degree_name

M.A.

Level thesis:degree_level

Masters

Grantor

Baylor University.

Year dc:date.issued

2005

Author dc:creator

• Calloway, Katherine.

Advisor dc:contributor.advisor

• Donnelly, Phillip J. (Phillip Johnathan), 1969-

• Milton, John, 1608-1674. Paradise lost.
• Milton, John, 1608-1674 -- Criticism and interpretation.
• Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura.
• Lucretius Carus, Titus -- Criticism and interpretation.

Statement dc:rights

• Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission.

Language dc:language.iso

en

Handle dc:identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/2104/14595

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/14595