Posts by Elli

The greek word "κενός" goes hand in hand with the word "μάταιος" and both have the same meaning. In english is the word "vain". An example, where Epicurus used these words, it is in one of his letter to Anaxarchos (see photo) :

The main point for Epicureans is not if gods are mortal or immortal, or any word someone may find. Frankly, I do not give a dime about that. If there are some aliens in outer space that can live in total bliss and pleasure that it would be great for them. But my life is here on this planet, and I have one and unique life to live. So, the main point of Epicurean Philosophy is to liberate us from those fears that are produced with empty beliefs and the opinions by the many which say that there is god's providence that a god created the Universe, so here comes and the lust of immortality and the worse here comes the necessity.

The almighty God provides, the multitude says, and that's how someone becomes a good andrapodo (slave) to his leaders, his god's representatives that all for me are mystic gurus and charlatans, that want all the pleasures for themselves, for making man going to his death empty-handed without living his life pleasantly. For this the first thing that they fought in Epicurus and his philosophy is the goal of pleasure and then all the others as senses, feelings, researches on sciences and all these that still keep to our days !

Yes, I agree totally with the word as used by DeWitt. The word in english and greek for "άφθαρτα" is "incorruptible" or "untouched" by the corruptible, and on the basis of Ethics I explained - as much as I could - the reasons why this word is the accurate one.

In this PD 1, Epicurus does not mention for gods any kind of characteristics with words such as imperishable or deathless or immortals. For Epicurus, Gods are such beings as "άφθαρτα", and in english the right word is given with "incorruptible" which and in greek also means "untouched" or else "without having any communication at all" by us the humans. And that also means that gods are such beings that can't be touched by our corruptible "virtues" that are synonym with our hypocritical morality which indicates that from the morning till the late hours at night, the hypocritical moralists (usually the believers of Abrahamic religions) in their prayers are throwing curse to each other and to all the infidels of this world, being always ready to make wars in the name of their absolute true god.

So, the fact for Epicurus and epicureans is that humans can't overpass their chimpanzee and gorillas DNA. For all humanity living totally in bliss/makarioi and pleasantly or else like gods among men, it is a mission impossible since from Epicurus era ==2400 years have passed == and our species still is doing wars without end. And for being a little pessimistic this will never happen forever and ever and till all the things on this planet will collapse and will be created again by atoms/ particles and the void (quantum field) and this is our FIRST and the most important PRINCIPLE.

Παρακαλώ, και είναι ευχαρίστησή μου !! (i.e. you're welcome, and it's my pleasure) Don

Don I totally agree with you. Moreover, the methodology of the Canon is also called as "στοιχειωτικόν" [pron. stoichiotikon] which means elementary.

"Καλούσι δ’ αυτό (το Κανονικό) περί κριτηρίου και αρχής, και στοιχειωτικόν" (DL Book 10, Epicurus 30)

And that means : They call it (the Canon) οn criterion and principle, and elementary.

And continues... for Dialectics they (epicureans) wholly reject as superfluous. For they say that the correspondence of words with things is sufficient for the natural philosophers.

And here is an image with a very important ES 29 :

I think the name Eugenios in english is Eugene. This work "περί ευγενείας" (on the nobility of birth) by Metrodorus has been lost. It is only mentioned by Diogenes Laertius in his book with the biography of Epicurus.

However, if we study very carefully our survival sources we can draw many conclusions of what means to be someone of "noble birth". The first principle and the most important for Epicurus and his philosophy is that is against herd's/mob's morality which is usually connected with misery, apathy, and contempt of what is beautiful/well, free and pleased, that is to say, herd's/mob's morality is whatever that leads to the pain and the decadence of any society.

But Epicurus on the basis of his philosophy declares: since I use the methodology of the Canon that came by Nature, for studying properly the Nature, I' m also capable enough to set the moral values/Ethics and for myself and with those that are like myself that we did agree to set them likewise since we all have the same goal.

Because when any moral values have been set by the mobs and their leaders - that are also connected with laws in a society - provoke fears, anger, pain, and contempt for hurting each other, these are against the goal of pleasure as Nature has set for us. So, then, says Epicurus, I have the autonomy that is synonym with "παρέγκλιση" (swerve) to find the right strategy to change and even the image of gods or any established laws if those are hurting the relationships among the people.

And as the brave Pericles in his Epitaph (survived by Thucydides) declares: «τὸ εὔδαιμον τὸ ἐλεύθερον, τὸ δ' ἐλεύθερον τὸ εὔψυχον κρίναντες». i.e. we are judging that bliss means freedom; and freedom means bravery.…and they are surely to be esteemed the bravest spirits who, having the clearest sense both of the pains and pleasures of life, do not on that account shrink from danger.

An honest philosopher is a free and brave spirit who does not say words that are liked to the ears of mobs or of monarchs/oligarchs and above all, an honest philosopher is not absolutist particularly of what is good and what is bad to become a tyrant himself or having any relationship with tyrants, and oligarchs and those people that are followers of false religions and false philosophies. And when we say false is whatever is against human nature that provokes/produces pain and not pleasure.

An honest philosopher knows how to put and his/her personal limits (among pleasure and pain), as well as, he knows very well where are the limits in a society of the regimes that are called - with political terms - Democracy and Tyranny. IMO both those regimes have to do on the basis of frankness of speech. The too much Democracy of a majority that speak about foolish things that are against Nature and pleasure, it is not Democracy, it's foolishness. And whoever says in a society issues that lead to the benefit and pleasure of the majority of the people, and that person is being censored by the few, it is not Democracy it is Oligarchy and Tyranny and it's foolishness too.

Here is an image with an epigram for Epicurus by Athenians, that is survived by Menander.

Welcome here Don . Your name or nickname in greek means the one that is of noble birth.

From DL we read : Epicurus was an Athenian, and the son of Neocles and Chaerestrate, of the demos of Gargettus, and of the family of the Philaidae, as Metrodorus tells us in his treatise on Nobility of Birth.

Εὖ πράττειν (may you practice well) καὶ ἡδέως ζῆν (and living pleasantly).

Neoplatonists are everywhere, they are under every stone all over the places. Here on this youtube video is a "nice" lesson on the work by Plato "Philebus" given by Mr. Pierre Crimes (sorry Grimes) and the Noetic Society.

http://noeticsociety.org/

The noetic society organizes seminars

e.g. seminar details:

Date:

Saturday and Sunday, November 2 and 3, 2019.

Schedule:

Saturday breakfast at 8am. Explorations from 9-11, 2-4, and 7-9. Lunch and dinner will take place during the breaks.

Sunday breakfast at 9am. Reflection and exploration from 10-12.

Location:

Sunset Beach Woman’s Club 16812 Bayview Drive Sunset Beach, CA

Cost: $150

Wow ! The works of the great Plato for just 150 bucks? This is what we call the best value for money. Well, get up right now from your sofas, your beds, your chairs, your offices, and run...This extraordinary offer for attending seminars on Plato and for just $150 it will not be tomorrow.

...and plant the explosives that will blow Plato's cave sky-high. And don't worry, the Stoics won't mind if they are caught in the explosion, because they are indifferent to all emotion anyway!

Μe thanks Cassius for the nice place here and above all our epicurean friendship !

Ι've translated an excerpt from a work by George Kaplanis “on wealth”, and when in 2014 the participation at the symposium of Athens was by some genuine epicureans, and before the raid of the Aristotelian-Stoic academic-professors.

<<...Philodemus teaches the methodology of analysis (the Canon). The second field of epicurean philosophy is the field of Ethics. This work that I will present to you is a part of my initial work which includes both fields. I've presented this initial work at the Thessaloniki's Garden. We present all of our works for the Symposium in the Garden and we’re discussing them. And as my friend Panagiotis (Papavassiliou) said : we all together (as a team) wrote them (the works). Thus, the joy of the Symposium, for us from Thessaloniki, begins one and a half months before the Symposium and if we add the discussion/criticism to the works which are another month, that is, the whole story about the Symposium lasts two and a half months.

Anyway, to not make a long story short "on wealth". There are various questions that our friends ask us in everyday life. The katastematic pleasure (with astonishment and irony) does it make us indifferent to wealth? Once we have the katastematic pleasure what else do we want?

The Epicurean philosophy, as we are told, as an "ascetic" philosophy is not hostile to wealth? That is, not only to be indifferent but also to be hostile to wealth. How could someone that deals with something noble as the philosophy is, to deal with the wealth that is something completely banal? That is, engaging in wealth does not kill the spirituality? What is the viewpoint of the epicurean philosophy on wealth?

Here I will make an observation that some religious moralists, for example, the Christians or their descendants who belong to any ideology, but let's speak about Christians now, as they have a clear view on wealth. That is why people also ask us for our opinion. Because the opinion of Christians is clear, it is written in their sacred texts such as: "whoever has wealth will not enter the kingdom of heaven". So Christians and wealth are unrelated things (laughs). Let us the epicureans also say, like them, some blunt words. Philodemus says this: The philosopher must be interested in wealth (laughs). To be concerned with wealth or as Epicurus himself says (κτήσεως προνοήσεσθαι και του μέλλοντος) that is to say to take care for your properties and provide for the future. Maybe someone is still wondering since Epicurus can be happy only with bread and water, so why do you want wealth? I would personally say that poverty is not the cause of happiness. That is, it is not needed when we seek happiness to go for living in a poor neighborhood.

There is also the view of cynics who say: We limit our needs, we limit our desires so we do not have to worry too much and be bothered in our lives. And we live a tranquil and peaceful life. Of course, Metrodorus, here, in his work on wealth does not accept this and he strongly disagrees. No, he says, this life is not in harmony, this life of cynics i.e. to limit your desires and needs is not harmoniously regulated. A harmonious life is harmonious when it does not predetermine now that there will be later a need to beg and rent ourselves in order to survive. In the ancient era to go and working as an employee it was like a curse.

And while the cynics let the frugality to fall uncontrollably downward, Socrates defines this frugality precisely with an amount, saying that five minas are enough to satisfy the natural and necessary of our lives. We need nothing more than 5 minas. Someone that knows he told me, that the ancient amount of 5 minas is about 500 euros of today. In any case, it is a small stable amount, which you will have as a stable income throughout your life. And you will spend with this stable small income all your life... and you'll be pleased too. Personally, in such a life I would drink the hemlock (laughs).

Of course, I think that this image of the cynics and Socrates that are telling you to sit steady there all your life is a very static image. It is too static for it to be sustained by Epicurean philosophy which is structured to deal with a flowing and constantly changing reality>>.

From LTM "And again independence of desire we think a great good".

The fact is that in this small sentence Epicurus does not mention anywhere that "independence of desire is a great good". This phrase, as a first principle, comes from Buddhism and not Epicurean Philosophy.

The translation in this phrase is erred since the word that Epicurus used is "self-sufficiency". Maybe, for this reason, some confuse that Epicurus speaks about "frugality" which is another word that is used for washing our brains on the basis of financial/political issues.

Self-sufficiency, as a philosophical diet, protects a thyself from fear and anxiety when there are some situations/circumstances/experiences that are not as "milk and honey". Epicurus does not trust the politicians. He does not trust the marketable education by academic professors and authors that hide another head of Lernea Hydra that is idealism. Epicurus does not trust the priesthood and the mob. Epicurus trusts only the freedom of the "self" that knows through his personal experiences to set the limits and with the usage of Epicuru's great methodology of the Canon, will answer with responsibility and prudently this question:

ES 71. Every desire must be confronted by this question: what will happen to me if the object of my desire is accomplished and what if it is not?

ES 77. The greatest fruit of self-sufficiency is freedom.

Because : «τὸ εὔδαιμον τὸ ἐλεύθερον, τὸ δ' ἐλεύθερον τὸ εὔψυχον κρίναντες». We are judging that bliss means freedom; and freedom means bravery and they are surely to be esteemed the bravest spirits who, having the clearest sense both of the pains and pleasures of life, do not on that account shrink from danger ...

...And we have invented for ourselves many relaxations from toil; we have regular games and sacrifices throughout the year; our homes are beautiful and elegant; and the pleasure which we daily feel in all these things helps to banish sorrow. Because of the greatness of our city the fruits of the whole earth flow in upon us; so that we enjoy the goods of other countries as freely as our own. (Pericle's Epitaph, by Thucydides).

And for this cause we call pleasure the beginning and end of the blessed life. For we recognize pleasure as the first good innate in us, and from pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to pleasure we return again, using the feeling as the standard by which we judge every good.

Sailings on the seas,

Tilling of fields, walls, laws, and arms, and roads,

Dress and the like, all prizes, all delights

Of finer life, poems, pictures, chiseled shapes

Of polished sculptures—all these arts were learned

By practice and the mind's experience,

As men walked forward step by eager step.

Thus time draws forward each and everything

Little by little into the midst of men,

And reason uplifts it to the shores of light.

For one thing after other did men see

Grow clear by intellect, till with their arts

They've now achieved the supreme pinnacle.

(DRN- Lucretius book V)

Νο, Cassius the word "moderation" does not exist in the epicurean texts. Epicurus speaks often for limits that the person is able to set them through his/her personal hedonic calculus.

On the above VS 45 there are also two greek words "περιμάχητον παιδείαν" [pron. perimachiton peadeian"] and is translated "the kind of education that is fought over by the many", although it literally means "the kind of education that is sought after by the many". That is to say, if you follow/study the marketable education that is based on Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and the like you will lose yourself/identity for becoming one of the mobs that follow blindly their leaders!

What has to do the "mega fronountes" (the great thinkers) with the "metrious" (moderates) and what has to do the "fainesthai" (to look like) with the "eisai" (of what you really are OR the genuine of yourself)?

Please read again the VS 45 and the words that are used by Epicurus as characteristics for all the genuine epicureans as "serious", "self-sufficient" and "mega fronountes" men. In english language, the words "mega fronountes" means "great thinkers" i.e. pride for their own personalities/themselves and their achievements/goods which are based on their own experiences that are measured prudently among pleasure and pain. In the greek language next to the word "metrious" that in english is given with the word "moderates" follows the greek word "tapeinos" (humble)...and good grief !

That is to say that the persistence of some persons to transform the "mega fronountes" i.e. the free, highly self-esteem epicureans for living as "moderates" and "humbles" i.e. as stoic andrapoda (slaves) obedient to their leaders/masters, it is still in vain.

Thanks, Cassius my friend for your interest, I feel a little better.