GARDEN OF EPICURUS

Tomas Kavaliauskas
The disciples of Epicurus lived in his garden for 600 years. His birthday was celebrated every month. Hedonism flourished. Flourished philosophy studies and pleasurable life.
In Galicina young ethicists did not live for 600 years. This summer they stayed for three weeks. They ate and drank, they read books and philosophized, they sought solutions for ethical issues, sometimes over night, in someone's balcony, not fearing that in the morning they'll have to attend lectures. Pleasure of communication, pleasure of wondering what is the meaning of philosophy or life occasionally was more important than rest. Bodily rest sometimes seemed less hedonistic than philosophical discussions near a pond or even in balcony of your hotel room, which was overlooking mature pine trees or Russian spirit emitting birch trees. It seemed like the line between hedonism and eudaimonism had vanished. Being a philosopher among other philosophers seemed a pleasure in itself - for the mind and for the body. The mind derived its pleasure from philosophical themes, the body from savoring wine while talking with the philosophers - Andrey, Yulia, Sergey, Polina.
It does get dark in Galicina in summer time, but shortly. If you are involved in a serious discussion, if you are happy, you do not notice how little by little dark starry night sky turns into pastel. So light.
The lectures weren't light. Ethical issues - euthanasia, just war theory, methods of ethics teaching, ought/is dichotomy and fact/value dichotomy in metaethics - made you think and rethink what you've already known.
Thinking was endless: during lectures, during lunch and dinner conversations, during individual consultations. Thinking for three weeks on ethical issues only - the privilege of a few.
And one could meditate on ethics as there were no other worries: food was prepared, bedding and towels changed every three days, tea breaks awaited after each lecture. Even Gods of the weather made sure that ethicists would not be disturbed if they wanted to have their cup of in a court-yard instead of a botanical hall with a fountain in the midst.
But Epicurian life for three weeks seemed too long for some participants. They wanted home. Some said that felt mentally tired, was difficult to concentrate, follow lectures. Maybe academic endurance of the participants wasn't even, maybe the level of invited professors to give lectures weren't equally intriguing. They did not want to mingle with the young ethicists after the lectures, they felt like guests, like professors as though their listeners were bachelor students, not university ethics associate professors who could discuss on equal terms.
But when time came to say good bye to each other, it seemed like everyone was touched by the sentimental mood of the farewell. It seemed like everyone became attached to each other. For some, three weeks united people. Some were on the verge of crying, eyes welled with tears. But it depended on who was to say good bye to whom. It wasn't an ideal community of the Garden of Epicurus. Not all even cared for such a comparison. There were factions of interest groups. And it's natural: why bother to talk to someone who you dislike? Not every ethicist by profession talked morally… It's good that the Garden of Epicurus was large enough for personal space and no more than three weeks. Staying there for 600 hundred years would be a hell in the Garden of Epicurus, not a citadel of hedonism.

Raminta Puchetaite
I teach business ethics and have seminars on ethics for undergraduate business and administration students at Vilnius University Kaunas Faculty of Humanities and write a dissertation on application of business ethics tools in human resource management. As courses on ethics for doctoral students (others than those in the department of philosophy or the Institute of Philosophy) are not taught at Vilnius University, I did not have an opportunity to advance my knowledge in philosophical and historical issues in ethics before. The three weeks of the summer school in Moscow diminished this gap of knowledge. It was a unique chance to listen to lectures and take part in master classes and seminars led by professional ethicists. As the themes were organized in cohesive blocs I could form an all-rounded view on certain ethical issues (e.g. euthanasia), ethics in particular fields of social activity (e.g. ethics of politics, Muslim ethics), certain thematic aspects in the works by the great philosophers (e.g. Aristotle). Some courses (e.g. Muslim ethics) were unexpectedly interesting and enlightening.
The school was also useful from methodical viewpoint. The evenings with film watching and their discussions were stimulating. In general, master classes on the ways of teaching ethics (especially by prof. R.Werner and later sharing of teaching experience among the school participants), group discussions on a given subject and films gave me an idea to create an elective course for the students of (English) philology that could integrate ethics, literary sources and films. I proposed this idea to our faculty's vice-dean on academic affairs, who is also the head of the Department of Germanic languages, and she approved of the idea and promised to consider it with other colleagues in autumn. I also suggested that some course papers and Bachelor theses on ethical reasoning of particularly acute issues like terrorism, war, corruption, etc. in the media could be written in collaboration with the Centre for Business Ethics (we have the practice of such inter-department cooperation). It was favourably accepted. This idea arose while listening to the lectures on military ethics by professors R. Holmes and N. Fotion and metaethics.
Moreover, the school gave an opportunity to know people who are involved in professional teaching of ethics, which is very important for my professional growth. Both formal and informal communication during the classes and in free time established contacts which can evolve into productive networking activities and further (research) projects.
I just lacked free time to communicate more with the other participants. Therefore, the decision, which we made together during the discussions on the efficiency of the school (which is also a very praised point), that there must be two free days in the week is a good solution, in my opinion. First, it gives more time for informal discussions with the participants, resource faculty and professors. Second, it makes the learning process not that stressful and overloaded. Third, it allows us to know a different culture. The trips to the capital city or to some other culturally, historically, etc. well-known place also gives certain knowledge about the modes of human behaviour. It is important for my classes on business ethics as the subject includes knowledge of cultural aspects of certain societies and the ways of decision making.
All in all, I am more than satisfied with the school and hope that the other two ones will be not less successful as this one.