Do Pigs Value Katastematic Pleasure? ( Summer 2022 K / K Discussion)

    I think it is important to re-state that the mind is a type of body, and that the satisfactions of the mind are, themselves, pleasures of the body. Regardless of any schema designed to organize the different pleasures into categories, all pleasures are pleasures of the body, require some type of energetic motion to instigate, and some of those active bodily pleasures are felt by the mental organ instead of the visual, auditory, chemical, kinesthetic, or thermal organs.


    I am very suspicious of the concept of katastematic pleasures in the first place because the related word katastēmatikós was elsewhere used to describe "sedation". If that were accurate, then the Cyrenaics would have a legitimate point about equating ataraxia with dreamless sleep. However, we know that all pleasures must be consciously experienced, so dreamless sleep is not a pleasure, nor are any other forms of sedation that limit our ability to experience.

    Quote from Nate

    require some type of energetic motion to instigate,

    Yes Nate I agree with everything you wrote but / and I want to stress that in saying that I agree I am not saying that I disagree with anyone else. This is not a contest of sides between us here but a struggle to better define the full picture so we develop a more usable interpretation that will help ourselves and others.


    Not one single person in this thread has chosen life in a cave with bread and water, because we know we are capable of much greater pleasure in life than that.


    That's why we can't let the implication stand of any formulation that implies that "desire in general" is to be condemned or reduced - to what? The minimal required to continue breathing?


    No one would suggest that in real life, and yet the formulations that are batted around not only "leave open that implication" (I am thinking of the phrasing Frances Wright used in the big debate between Zeno and Epicurus) - they not only leave open the implication of asceticism, they COMPEL it if "reducing the desires" is an accurate statement of the road to happiness.


    Epicurus was a philosopher and he would never have embraced such a general rule as "The way to happiness is to reduce the desires" because the best way to "reduce the desires" .... (I will space us another metaphor involving bullets!)


    However that IS the explicit teaching of major worldviews that are out there, and I would label all Abrahamic religion (maybe is should just say monotheistic religion) as essentially guilty of the same mischief when they command you to replace YOUR desires with those of "God."


    I am really glad that we are having this discussion because it's another variation of one of the key issues that prevents Epicurean philosophy from being understandable to "normal healthy people" (who we all need, even if we are like me rapidly approaching my expiration date :-). )

    Quote from Nate

    I think it is important to re-state that the mind is a type of body, and that the satisfactions of the mind are, themselves, pleasures of the body. Regardless of any schema designed to organize the different pleasures into categories, all pleasures are pleasures of the body, require some type of energetic motion to instigate, and some of those active bodily pleasures are felt by the mental organ instead of the visual, auditory, chemical, kinesthetic, or thermal organs.

    I think this is an important observation. Yes, the mind is a body composed of atoms just like the rest of the physical universe. I also think there are katastematic and kinetic pleasures, but I'll get to that in a moment. Nate's point though is one reason I'm always skeptical of some commentators saying that the motion of kinetic has to do with atoms moving. I don't think that's it at all.

    Quote from Nate

    I am very suspicious of the concept of katastematic pleasures in the first place because the related word katastēmatikós was elsewhere used to describe "sedation". If that were accurate, then the Cyrenaics would have a legitimate point about equating ataraxia with dreamless sleep.

    On re-reading your post, Nate: Are you saying you're skeptical of the concept itself of katastematic pleasures? Or that Epicurus used that dichotomy between katastempatic/kinetic?


    As for Epicurus using the term, in my mind, I'm (fairly firmly) convinced that he did. The quote from On Choices and Avoidances in Diogenes Laertius plus other citations and references sort of clinches it for me. By Zeus, even DeWitt seems to have accepted it ;)


    On the concept itself, I am not too concerned about colloquial uses of the term katastematic like "sedation." LSJ simply glosses it as "pertaining to a state or condition."

    Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Κκ , κατάσσυ^τος , καταστηματικός

    see also

    Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, κατάστημα


    So, to me, katastematic pleasures are those that pertain to a state of being (a state of being free of fear, a state of being free of pain, a state of being calm, a state of being in homeostasis, etc.) which can be extended with little effort. Once the "fear of death" is eliminated, one can exist in a state free of the fear of death indefinitely (as long as one doesn't fall back into error... although the characteristics of the wise one include "once the sage has become wise, they will no longer fall back into ignorance". Once you eliminate a false belief, it's eliminated.)

    Kinetic pleasures - those sanctioned by the Cyrenaics and others as "pleasures" - are active pleasures in which one engages in the moment. Kinetic pleasures are fleeting but they provide variety to one's existence.

    Katastematic pleasure is the music playing in the background of the movie scene pulling the story together. Kinetic pleasures are the explosions and action sequences and provide the variety to the story. Both are necessary for an interesting superhero movie (Sorry, best film analogy I could come up with!)

    Quote from Don

    Kinetic pleasures - those sanctioned by the Cyrenaics and others as "pleasures" - are active pleasures in which one engages in the moment. Kinetic pleasures are fleeting but they provide variety to one's existence.

    I am thinking that even a description like that cedes too much to the people who are acting as if Epicurus' every third word was "katastematic."


    The problem that most people legitimately won't understand is that "engagement with the moment" involves every intellectual and emotional response in life no matter how "sublime" and "high" and even "noble.". If you feel it in the normal sense of feeling, then that is active engagement with the world and that is what life is all about - life is lived moment by moment and there is no "stored up capital" like a Christian might say about storing up treasures in heaven.


    The commentators seem to be all over the board about what katastematic really means, and I see some of the recent articles are asserting that katastematic pleasure is "felt" just like kinetic.


    There is definitely in Epicurean thought a strong emphasis on considering "healthy functioning" and even "attitudes" as important pleasures. But to consider it important to categorize them as "katastematic" rather than explaining clearly what he is talking about and giving examples in the letter to Menoeceus, for example, which would have been followed clearly by Lucretius and Philodemus, is just not something I can see as a pattern Epicurus generally followed.


    I am generally very hesitant to read too much into the fragmentary Philodemus material, but to me observing Philodemus and Lucretius failing to utter anything that would appear to support this as an important distinction speaks volumes.

    Quote from Cassius

    The problem that most people legitimately won't understand is that "engagement with the moment" involves every intellectual and emotional response in life no matter how "sublime" and "high" and even "noble."

    See, I don't think my definition/examples of katastematic pleasures are sublime, high, or noble. I think they're just different than dancing, drinking, dining, having sex, etc. Freeing ones mind from an erroneous belief or delusion doesn't involve a physical/visible action but a mental action. As Nate mentioned, it's all based on a physical bodies so I hesitate to say "physical" but it'll do.

    I'm trying to understand why Epicurus felt obliged(?) to use the katastematic/kinetic dichotomy but I do not think he dwelt on it. He needed to differentiate his school clearly from the Cyrenaics and this seems to have been the fastest route. So he took it and moved on.

    I feel as if my brain is slightly "under-performing" lately -- I am just barely following this whole discussion.


    You've all wrote so much, and now I have to add this, which may not be supported by any texts or writings of Epicurus -- Besides katastematic "calmness" there should be a category for pleasures such as friendship and self-sufficiency (these "goods" could almost fall into the katastematic category). Once you establish either a friendship or self-sufficiency (which I define as the ability to provide basic necessities for yourself, but there could be other definitions) there is a solidity (and it has a static quality which doesn't come and go quickly) and it can be relied upon for pleasure in a much different manner than food and sensual enjoyments.

    Quote from Cassius

    life is lived moment by moment and there is no "stored up capital" like a Christian might say about storing up treasures in heaven

    An Epicurean could adapt this idea metaphorically -- doing what is pleasant, joyful, and pleasurable so that it can be made into good memories for reminiscing about later, and the "heaven" would be the act of talking about shared memories with friends.

    Post
    RE: Do Pigs Value Katastematic Pleasure? ( Summer 2022 K / K Discussion)
    I wanted to address the title of Metrodorus's book that is cited by Clement of Alexandria.
    The title in Greek is:
    Περι του μειζονα ειναι την παρ' ἡμας αἰτιαν προς εὐδαιμονιαν της ἐκ των πραγματων
    The "New Advent" English translation is:
    On the Source of Happiness in Ourselves being greater than that which arises from Objects
    I don't entirely agree with the translation choices made there, but they'll do well enough.
    What I want to do is look at several key words that impact our current discussion on…
    Don


    In light of Metrodorus's book title and reference, I found VS45 very interesting:

    VS45 The study of what is natural produces not braggarts nor windbags nor those who show off the culture that most people fight about, but those who are fearless and self-reliant and who value their own good qualities rather than the good things that have come to them from external circumstances.

    οὐ κομποὺς οὐδὲ φωνῆς ἐργαστικοὺς οὐδὲ τὴν περιμάχητον παρὰ τοῖς πολλοῖς παιδείαν ἐνδεικνυμένους φυσιολογία παρασκευάζει, ἀλλὰ σοβαροὺς καὶ αὐτάρκεις καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀγαθοῖς, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν πραγμάτων μέγα φρονοῦντες.

    Note that what Saint-Andre translates as "external circumstances" is πραγμάτων - the exact same word Metrodorus uses in his book title: Περι του μειζονα ειναι την παρ' ἡμας αἰτιαν προς εὐδαιμονιαν της ἐκ των πραγματων

    There's also the μειζονα and μέγα in the two passages.

    I think VS45 and the title of Metrodorus's book title are saying the same thing: we can rely more on the pleasure that arises from within us than we can on the pleasures that arise from external circumstances.

    In my view: The pleasure from internal sources is katastematic ; the pleasure from external activities and circumstances is kinetic (arising from πραγμάτων ).

    Quote from Don

    we can rely more on the pleasure that arises from within us than we can on the pleasures that arise from external circumstances.

    This seems to make perfect sense based on practical day-to-day experience. It also strikes me as a correction of the Stoic inner citadel idea.

    To expand on Metrodorus and VS45, here are other uses of πραγμάτων (pragmatōn) that are in line with those and pertinent to my thinking:


    PD21

    Ὁ τὰ πέρατα τοῦ βίου κατειδὼς οἶδεν, ὡς εὐπόριστόν ἐστι τὸ <τὸ> ἀλγοῦν κατ᾽ ἔνδειαν ἐξαιροῦν καὶ τὸ τὸν ὅλον βίον παντελῆ καθιστάν: ὥστ᾽ οὐδὲν προσδεῖται πραγμάτων ἀγῶνας κεκτημένων.

    One who perceives the limits of life knows how easy it is to expel the pain produced by a lack of something and to make one's entire life complete; so that there is no need for the things that are achieved through struggle. (Saint-Andre)

    Saint-Andre note on the text: The word ἀγών, translated here as "struggle", originally referred to the contests pursued by athletes at public festivals such as the Olympic games; Epicurus is not necessarily counselling against personal discipline (such as that involved in learning true philosophy), but against the trials and dangers of action in the public arena.


    My note on the text: The use of πραγμάτων (pragmatōn) here is perfectly in line with the idea of "external circumstances or things." Plus the pain referred to in the first part ἀλγοῦν from ἄλγος can refer to both pain of the body or of the mind, which to me aligns with aponia and ataraxia, respectively.

    Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἄλγος


    PD38 also uses pragmatōn twice:

    When circumstances have not changed and things that were thought to be just are shown to not be in accord with our basic grasp of justice, then those things were not just. But when circumstances do change and things that were just are no longer useful, then those things were just while they brought mutual advantage among companions sharing the same community; but when later they did not bring advantage, then they were not just.

    ἔνθα μὴ καινῶν γενομένων τῶν περιεστώτων πραγμάτων ἀνεφάνη μὴ ἁρμόττοντα εἰς τὴν πρόληψιν τὰ νομισθέντα δίκαια ἐπʼ αὐτῶν τῶν ἔρων, οὐκ ἦν ταῦτα δίκαια· ἔνθα δὲ καινῶν γενομένων τῶν πραγμάτων οὐκέτι συνέφερε τὰ αὐτὰ δίκαια κείμενα, ἐνταῦθα δὴ τότε μὲν ἦν δίκαια ὅτε σενέφερεν εἰς τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους κοινωνίαν τῶν συμπολιτευομένων, ὕστερον δʼ οὐκ ἦν ἔτι δίκαια ὅτε μὴ συνέφερεν.


    Not quite as directly relevant but still nominally applying to circumstances and actions.


    Once again, here's the LSJ entry for πράγμα (pragma) (pragmatōn is simply the plural genitive of pragma, ie, "of pragmas")

    Greek Word Study Tool


    PS: I don't pass up an opportunity to recommend Nate 's compilation of the Principal Doctrines. Always instructive to see alternative translations along with the original Greek.

    I thought it might be helpful to compile a list of pleasures and then try to group them accordingly. This is by no means an authoritative list, and we may find plenty of areas of overlap or disagreement:


    Katastematic Pleasures:

    Understanding that neither God nor Death are to be feared (KD 1, 2)

    Reassurance that all pain is temporary and severe pain is brief (KD 3)

    Acceptance that heavenly events are non-sentient physical phenomena (KD 11)

    Dispelling ignorance and suspicion through a dedicated study of Nature (KD 12)

    Enjoying the peace acheived by withdrawing from the crowd (KD 14, Fragment 86, 87)

    Knowing the limit of pleasure through reasoned understanding (KD 18)

    Acknowledging that infinite time contains no great pleasure that limited time (KD 19)

    Appreciating that there is no need to live by the evil of necessity (VS 9)

    Understanding the value in knowing that we are only born once (VS 14)

    Overcoming the suffering of mental anxiety and physical pain (VS 24, Fragment 1)

    Reflecting when the body is neither hungry, nor thirsty, nor cold (VS 33)

    Eliminating regret knowing that the past cannot be changed (VS 55)

    Knowing that what is sufficient are simple pleasures (VS 68)

    Using reason to overcome hate, envy, and contempt (WMS 1)

    Accepting that prophecy does not exist and there is not fate (Fragment 2)

    Calculating the means to support the stable condition of the body (Fragment 11)

    Recollecting joyful memories against severe physical pain (Fragment 30)

    Committing to a love of true philosophy to reduce disturbance (Fragment 66)

    Focusing on the present moment instead of an uncertain future (Fragment 78)


    Kinetic Pleasures:

    Sharing pleasant interactions with friends and loved ones KD 27, VS 52, VS 61)

    Receiving assistance in the form of utility from friends (VS 23)

    Venerating the wise so as to emulate their blessed life (VS 32)

    Laughing and enjoying humor while practicing true philosophy (VS 41)

    Practice virtuous habits knowing that they produces pleasure (VS 46)

    Responsibly enjoying luxuries so as not to become a frugal ascetic (VS 63)

    Receiving praise from others, while not asking for it (VS 64)

    Being deeply moved by feeling while not succumbing to it (WMS 2)

    Showing gratitude by speaking well of one’s friends (WMS 3)

    Marry and have children if it can be done safely (WMS 12)

    Taking care of one’s property and possessions (WMS 21)

    Enjoying the sites and smells of the countryside (WMS 22)

    Embrace fortune and use it to diversify pleasures (WMS 23)

    Conversing about music and poetry (WMS 28)

    Jubilation while enjoying pleasures involving motion (Fragment 1)

    Enjoying the taste of a meal, maybe a pot of cheese (Fragment 10, 33)

    Exploring the spectrum of healthy sexual pleasures (Fragment 10)

    Listening to pleasant sounds and meaningful music (Fragment 10)

    Viewing beautiful forms as compelling visual art (Fragment 10)

    Cooling or warming oneself to a comfortable temperature (Fragment 44)

    Nate:


    Thanks for a very good list! By what criteria did you place each reference in each category? Someone reading your post casually might think that the cites themselves categorize the pleasure into the location you placed it, but I gather of course that that is not the case, and you are categorizing them yourself according to some criteria.


    Can you spell out as best you can how you organized the two lists?

    Quote from Cassius

    Nate:


    Thanks for a very good list! By what criteria did you place each reference in each category? Someone reading your post casually might think that the cites themselves categorize the pleasure into the location you placed it, but I gather of course that that is not the case, and you are categorizing them yourself according to some criteria.


    Can you spell out as best you can how you organized the two lists?

    Aye, there's the rub. In general, my katastematic list includes pleasures that are enjoyed through the volitional activities of the mind (calculation, meditation, reflection, etc.) whereas my kinetic list includes pleasures that can be enjoyed without intellectual analysis and correction (hearing the sounds of birds in nature, being warmed by the sun, etc.).


    I am personally associating katastematic pleasures with "pleasures of the mind" and kinetic pleasures with "pleasures of the soul" (noting in Lucretian terms that the mind is the volitional part of the soul).

    Quote from Nate

    Aye, there's the rub

    Yes indeed that is the rub of this whole discussion.


    In the absence of clear authority from Epicurus as to how he was doing it, the whole endeavor is little more than speculation. Even attempting to use the examples that seem reliable (for example the reference to joy and delight as kinetic) can in my mind be equally something entirely volitional or "automatic" and without analysis.


    But the approach you are taking in attempting to be specific is almost certainly the way forward as that will provide good examples of which we can debate the merits. From there we can work on more precision and the precision will (I am confident) point out the problems with the current mainstream analysis.

    At some point, I'd like to consolidate my thinking on this topic with relevant citations to the source material. I think it would also be fruitful to really understand what the Cyrenaics thought as Epicurus drew a definite contrast between them and the Garden.

    Yes it has always been something of a mystery to me too what the Cyreniacs really thought. I suspect the caricatures of them cannot really be true either, so as usual it will be "stepping in the dark" trying to sniff it out.

    Quote from Cassius

    Yes it has always been something of a mystery to me too what the Cyreniacs really thought.

    There is a chapter which contains comparisons between Epicurus and the Cyreniacs in the book: "Pleasure in Ancient Greek Philosophy" - I skimmed enough to see that it goes into great detail (and it hurts my brain, so may not read it).


    Which you can find the link to the PDF of the book here:

    Post
    RE: Do Pigs Value Katastematic Pleasure? ( Summer 2022 K / K Discussion)
    I just found this, and it looks like a worthwhile read, and may be good for those who want a clear presentation of things -- Chapter 7 -- starts with a very clear introduction and then at about 5 pages into it, goes into a comparison of kinetic/kastastematic. I didn't get very far into it, so not sure what his full take on Epicureanism is. (Is this already referenced somewhere on the forum?)

    "Pleasure in Ancient Greek Philosophy" by David Wolfsdorf

    …
    Kalosyni


    I prefer to keep things simple, though I may come back to diving in deeper into all of this sometime in the future.


    For now I would like to think of pleasures as a bouquet of flowers -- everyone has certain flowers that they like better than other flowers and the bouquet is best with a nice mix of flowers -- and everyone is happiest when they are free to choose for themselves which flowers to have in their bouquet. The foundation of the best life is like the water in the flower vase -- we need safety, freedom, self-suffiency, friends, wisdom, peace of mind, good health (these are katastematic?) The flowers are the daily changing pleasures of the sweet life which are a mix of physical and mental pleasures (these are kinetic?)

    I think this is important: (emphasis added)

    ‘Nor, (the Cyrenaics) say, is pleasure brought about through memory or expectation of goods, as Epicurus held: for the motion of the soul is obliterated by time’ (DL 2.89–90) (τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς κίνημα). I take this to mean that although you can, implicitly, derive mental pleasure now from a bodily pleasure you are likewise enjoying now, the mental enjoyment is eliminated when you are temporally separated from the bodily pleasure, whether it lies in the past or the future.7


    Epicurean versus Cyrenaic happiness
    Epicurean versus Cyrenaic happiness
    www.academia.edu


    [89] ἡ δὲ τοῦ ἀλγοῦντος ὑπεξαίρεσις, ὡς εἴρηται παρ᾽ Ἐπικούρῳ, δοκεῖ αὐτοῖς μὴ εἶναι ἡδονή: οὐδὲ ἡ ἀηδονία ἀλγηδών. ἐν κινήσει γὰρ εἶναι ἀμφότερα, μὴ οὔσης τῆς ἀπονίας ἢ τῆς ἀηδονίας κινήσεως, ἐπεὶ ἡ ἀπονία οἱονεὶ καθεύδοντός ἐστι κατάστασις. δύνασθαι δέ φασι καὶ τὴν ἡδονήν τινας μὴ αἱρεῖσθαι κατὰ διαστροφήν: οὐ πάσας μέντοι τὰς ψυχικὰς ἡδονὰς καὶ ἀλγηδόνας ἐπὶ σωματικαῖς ἡδοναῖς καὶ ἀλγηδόσι γίνεσθαι. καὶ γὰρ ἐπὶ ψιλῇ τῇ τῆς πατρίδος εὐημερίᾳ ὥσπερ τῇ ἰδίᾳ χαρὰν ἐγγίνεσθαι. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ κατὰ μνήμην τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἢ προσδοκίαν ἡδονήν φασιν ἀποτελεῖσθαι: ὅπερ ἤρεσκεν Ἐπικούρῳ. 27 [90] ἐκλύεσθαι γὰρ τῷ χρόνῳ τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς κίνημα. λέγουσι δὲ μηδὲ κατὰ ψιλὴν τὴν ὅρασιν ἢ τὴν ἀκοὴν γίνεσθαι ἡδονάς. τῶν γοῦν μιμουμένων θρήνους ἡδέως ἀκούομεν, τῶν δὲ κατ᾽ ἀλήθειαν ἀηδῶς. μέσας τε καταστάσεις ὠνόμαζον ἀηδονίαν καὶ ἀπονίαν. πολὺ μέντοι τῶν ψυχικῶν τὰς σωματικὰς ἀμείνους εἶναι, καὶ τὰς ὀχλήσεις χείρους τὰς σωματικάς. ὅθεν καὶ ταύταις κολάζεσθαι μᾶλλον τοὺς ἁμαρτάνοντας. χαλεπώτερον γὰρ τὸ πονεῖν, οἰκειότερον δὲ τὸ ἥδεσθαι ὑπελάμβανον. ὅθεν καὶ πλείονα οἰκονομίαν περὶ θάτερον ἐποιοῦντο. διὸ καὶ καθ᾽ αὑτὴν αἱρετῆς οὔσης τῆς ἡδονῆς τὰ ποιητικὰ ἐνίων ἡδονῶν ὀχληρὰ

    πολλάκις ἐναντιοῦσθαι: ὡς δυσκολώτατον αὐτοῖς φαίνεσθαι τὸν ἀθροισμὸν τῶν ἡδονῶν εὐδαιμονίαν ποιούντων.


    Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, Β, Κεφ. η᾽. ΑΡΙΣΤΙΠΠΟΣ

    Just with that tantalizing bit, it would seem to me to look like the kinetic pleasures were pleasures experienced in the moment. Katastematic pleasures, which the Cyrenaics didn't recognize as pleasures, are the ones that are "brought about through memory or expectation of goods."

    I know I seem like Negative Nellie here, but wouldn't the pleasure you get from planning and carrying out some activity in expectation of the reward that the activity will bring be something that has to ring of "action"? I thought that katastematic was supposedly implying "rest" or "static." When I am all wrapped up in building my moon rocket the expectation of getting into space may be the reward but I am certainly very involved in "action" during the building of the rocket.


    Dividing things up like you are suggesting is a tempting way of categorizing things by "the time the reward is experienced," but "the timing of the reward" isn't anywhere suggested as relevant in any of the material we have been working from that DL or Cicero talk about as to "katastematic", is it?