All true. But when you eliminate any reason to reign in rampant desire, other than personal preference, most people (other than philosophers and their students) take that as license to do whatever they want. You see the symptoms of that in Rome (although Epicurianism may have been a symptom of existing sickness in Rome rather than a cause) and you see the same thing in America and Western Europe (largely, imho, as a result of secular humanism).
The parallel is actually quite remarkable. Philosophical secular humanists today all have systems that they think provide a non-religious reason to behave properly. That may work for them and their disciples; but in society at large, the message is "do whatever you want" because there is no reason not to. But perhaps they too (like Epicurians) are just a symptom (not a cause) of the degeneration of our culture caused by wealth, idle time, and endless nattering about feelings and other unimportant things by folks like Oprah.
“When you eliminate any reason to reign in rampant desire, other than personal preference, most people (other than philosophers and their students) take that as license to do whatever they want.”
The best prevention of unreasoned greed is to provide the young child with love, safety, and community. This can be done very well in a religious community, but as you point out a philosophically based community can create similar results. Personally, I think it is better to do the right thing because greed, lack of consideration, etc. have been reasoned to be undesirable. I do not think the idea of doing the right thing because God will be angry is as healthy. No more than doing the right thing because dad will beat the s*** out of you if you don’t.
Actually the better self-discipline seems to result from very mild punishment or disapproval from a loved authority figure. When the child is about to repeat the undesired activity, they feel vaguely uncomfortable and don’t do it. Because the reproof was mild they don’t remember it, whereas they would remember a beating and perhaps not do it then, but when older and no longer with the beater. This is called “cognitive dissonance”.