Major schools of thought in International Relations often overlook human lives in the larger scheme of things due to their misanthropic state-centrism. This article attempts to apply the philosophical tenets of the classical thinker Epicurus to theorize an Epicurean theoretical framework for International Relations and to place humans and their communities at the center of global politics. The author conducts a thematic analysis of Epicurean thought, drawing on Epicurus’s writings and modern scholarly works to construct a comprehensive view of his ideas on human nature, society, state, and justice. Using these postulations as tools, the author then provides a scheme for developing an Epicurean International Relations model that challenges mainstream theoretical developments in International Relations Theory by advocating for an approach that can keep up with the flux of global polity.
AbozaidAhmed M.2025. ‘Violence as a Constitutive of States’. International Political Sociology19, no. 2: 1–22.
2.
AcharyaAmitav.2011. ‘Dialogue and Discovery: In Search of International Relations Theories Beyond the West’. Millennium: Journal of International Studies39, no. 3: 619–637.
3.
AhmedNafeez Mosaddeq.2011. ‘The International Relations of Crisis and the Crisis of International Relations: From the Securitisation of Scarcity to the Militarisation of Society’. Global Change, Peace & Security23, no. 3: 335–355.
AustinEmily A.2012. ‘Epicurus and the Politics of Fearing Death’. Apeiron45, no. 2: 109–129.
6.
BainWilliam, and TerryNardin.2017. ‘International Relations and Intellectual History’. International Relations31, no. 3: 213–226.
7.
BellColleen, and NicoleWegner.2025. ‘Feminist Foreign Policy as a Case of Governance Feminism: Neoliberalism, Militarism, and Women as Agents of Change’. International Studies Review27, no. 1:1–22.
8.
BrownEric.2009. ‘Politics and Society’. In Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by WarrenJames, 179–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
BuzanBarry.2018. ‘How and How Not to Develop IR Theory: Lessons from Core and Periphery’. Chinese Journal of International Politics11, no. 4: 391–414.
10.
ChristensenAnna B.2020. ‘Epicureans on Friendship, Politics, and Community’. In Routledge Handbook of Hellenistic Philosophy, edited by ArensonKelly, 307–318. New York: Routledge.
11.
ChroustAnton Hermann.1953. ‘Philosophy of Law of the Epicureans’. Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review16, no. 2: 217–267.
12.
ClastresPierre.1989. Society Against the State: Essays in Political Anthropology, translated by Robert Hurley and Abe Stein. New York City: Zone Books.
13.
CooperJohn M.1999. ‘Pleasure and Desire in Epicurus’. In Reason and Emotion, edited by CooperJohn M., 485–514. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
14.
DevetakRichard.2017. ‘The Battle Is All There Is: Philosophy and History in International Relations Theory’. International Relations31, no. 3: 261–281.
15.
DonnellyJack.2000. Realism and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Epicurus. 2021. Fundamental Books of Epicurus: Principal Doctrines, Vatican Sayings, and Letters, translated by Robert Drew Hicks and Rui Medeiros. Bristol: Self-Published.
17.
ErlerMichael.2020. Epicurus: An Introduction to His Practical Ethics and Politics. Basel: Deutsche Nationalbibliothek.
18.
FarringtonBenjamin.1967. Faith of Epicurus. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
19.
FishJeffrey.2011. ‘Not All Politicians are Sisyphus: What Roman Epicureans Were Taught About Politics’. In Epicurus and the Epicurean tradition, edited by FishJeffrey and SandersKirk, 72–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
FletcherRichard.2012. ‘Epicurus’s Mistresses: Pleasure Authority and Gender in the Reception of the Kuriai Doxai in the Second Sophistic’. In Dynamic Reading: Studies in the Reception of Epicureanism, edited by HolmesBrooke and ShearinW. H., 52–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
GaddisJohn Lewis.2007. Cold War: A New History. New York City: Penguin Books.
22.
HallIan.2017. ‘History of International Thought and International Relations Theory: From Context To Interpretation’. International Relations31, no. 3: 241–260.
23.
JahnBeate.2021. ‘Critical Theory in Crisis? A Reconsideration’. European Journal of International Relations27, no. 4: 1274–1299.
24.
KeeneEdward.2017. ‘International Intellectual History and International Relations: Contexts, Canons and Mediocrities’. International Relations31, no. 3: 341–356.
25.
KerrWilliam.2021. Darwinian Social Evolution and Social Change: The Evolution of Nationalisms. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
26.
LongAnthony Arthur.2006. ‘Part III: Epicureanism’. In From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic Roman Philosophy, by Anthony Arthur Long, 155–220. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
Lucretius. 2001. De Rerum Natura, translated by Martin Ferguson Smith. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Classics Series.
28.
MolloySeán.2009. ‘Aristotle Epicurus, Morgenthau and the Political Ethics of the Lesser Evil’. Journal of International Political Theory5, no. 1: 94–112.
29.
MorelPierre Marie.2014. ‘Epicurus’ Garden: Ethics Politics’. In Routledge Companion to Ancient Philosophy, edited by SheffieldFrisbee and WarrenJames, 469–481. New York: Routledge.
30.
O’KeefeTimothy.2001. ‘Would a Community of Wise Epicureans Be Just?’Ancient Philosophy21, no. 1: 133–146.
31.
PetersonV. Spike.2022. ‘Security and Sovereign States: What Is at Stake in Taking Feminism Seriously?’In Gendered States: Feminist (Re)Visions of International Relations Theory, edited by Spike PetersonV. , 31–64. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
32.
RamelliIlaria.2017. ‘The Background of Greek Philosophy and Ancient Judaism: Asceticism, Slavery, and Socio-economic Injustice’. In Social Justice and the Legitimacy of Slavery: The Role of Philosophical Asceticism from Ancient Judaism to Late Antiquity, edited by RamelliIlaria, 26–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
RoskamGeert.2020. ‘Politics and Society’. In Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism, edited by MitsisPhillip, 284–307. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
SahlinsMarshall.2017. ‘The Original Political Society’. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory7, no. 2: 91–128.
35.
SchofieldMalcolm.2008. ‘Epicurean and Stoic Political Thought’. In Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, edited by RoweChristopher, SchofieldMalcolm, HarrisonSimon and LaneMelissa, 437–443. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
SmithSteve.2013. ‘Introduction: Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory’. In International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, edited by DunneTim, KurkiMilja, and SmithSteve, 1–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
StanishCharles.2017. The Evolution of Human Co-operation: Ritual and Social Complexity in Stateless Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
StrodachGeorge K.2019. Philosophy of Epicurus. New York City: Dover Publications.
40.
SylvesterChristine.2013. ‘Experiencing the End and Afterlives of International Relations/Theory’. European Journal of International Relations19, no. 3: 609–626.
41.
ThrasherJohn J.2013. ‘Reconciling Justice and Pleasure in Epicurean Contractarianism’. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice16, no. 2: 423–436.
42.
UsenerHermann.1887. Epicurea. Leipzig: Teubner.
43.
WalkerR. B. J.2022. ‘Gender and Critique in Theory of International Relations’. In Gendered States: Feminist (Re)Visions of International Relations Theory, edited by Spike PetersonV., 179–202. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
44.
WaltzKenneth N.1979. Theory of International Politics. Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
45.
WilcoxLauren B.2015. Bodies of Violence: Theorizing Embodied Subjects in International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.
46.
WilsonCatherine.2015. Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
