New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius
Oh, and the table referred to in the episode: Determinism vs Fatalism
For your consideration...
During the episode, I expressed my misgivings/frustrations about the stock phrase "choice and avoidance." Avoiding, avoid, and avoidance have always struck me as milquetoast words. It reminds me of stepping around a mud puddle. "I avoided getting my foot wet."
Epicurus specific words are in the title of the work that laid out his thoughts on these actions: Περὶ αἱρέσεων καὶ φυγῶν. (Peri haireseon kai phugon). First, let's get the LSJ definitions on the table:
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, αἵρεσις
αἵρεσις (hairesis) does mean "choice" but the connotation for me is much more active than just "choosing": "purpose, course of action or thought" Interestingly enough, it can also refer to the "taking" of a town by an army. It connotes for me an active process, not just a casual "choosing" what one has for dinner. I can live with "choice, choosing" but want to keep that active connotation in mind.
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, φεύγω
φεύγω is what I really dislike translated as "avoidance." The first LSJ definition is "flee, take flight." If αἵρεσις is the taking of a town, φεύγω is fleeing or retreating. LSJ states that it is the opposite of διώκω which it "pursue or chase." A form of that word shows up in VS46:
We cast off common customs just as we would do to wicked men who have been causing great harm for a long time.
τὰς φαύλας συνηθείας ὥσπερ ἄνδρας πονηροὺς πολὺν χρόνον μέγα βλάψαντες τελείως ἐκδιώκομεν.
ἐκδιώκομεν in this context means "to chase away, banish." So, φεύγω would refer to those being chased or being banished.
So, in keeping with my active sense of αἵρεσις, I see the same for φεύγω. It's not just a casual avoidance or avoiding, it is an active fleeing, taking flight (as in Gandalf's telling the Fellowship "Fly, you fools!" as he fell in Moria), or escaping from something. True, LSJ includes "avoid" but down the list and in the context of all those other active words.
So, I much prefer, if I were to translate Epicurus's book Περὶ αἱρέσεων καὶ φυγῶν (and subsequent mentions of the practice) as "Concerning Choice and Flight" or "Choice and Escape" or "Pursuit and Escape" or something more active than "Choice and 'Avoidance'." You'll often see me use "choice or rejection" on the forum, but I would prefer to use one of those other translations.
So what are the literal definitions of that word. I can't imagine Don will be satisfied unless we have three or four synonymous usages!
Ok I see the dictionary version....
Seems I remember something similar in the Torquatus discussion about analogies and extensions perhaps.
There's also the verb:
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Σ ς, , συμμ<ε>ικτέον , συμμετρ-έω
Consider the συμ- sym- similar to the sym- in sympathy "together with (feeling "pathy")"
-metreō "measure"
So... Measuring one thing together with another, weighing against each other, judging two things together, etc.
Welcome! Χαίρε! Salve! 
"Measuring" brings to mind the "measuring stick" (Canon). Is that more than coincidence? Is there a relation in the Greek, or is it just a quirk of the English?
I can see where you're coming from; but, unfortunately, it's just a quirk of English. The canon is κανών kanōn. Symmetrēsis does have connections to English meter.
Great call, Nate!! I don't know how that passed me by!
[130] So, all pleasure, through its nature, belongs to us as a good; however, not all are elected; and just as all pains are entirely evil by their nature, so not all are always to be shunned.It is proper when judging these things to consider what is advantageous and what is not advantageous for you; in other words, what the consequences will be. We consult the consequences of our actions; because, on the one hand, pleasure over time can lead to pain; and on the other hand, pain can lead to pleasure.
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Σ ς, , συμμ<ε>ικτέον , συμμέτρ-ησις
"Hedonic calculus" does seem to be essentially an outdated, Benthamite Utilitarianism term, originally associated with literally counting up the dolors and hedons... which is in reality impossible, from my perspective. There is no absolute quantification of pleasure points or pain values. Choice and rejection is an art, not a science.
Maybe it *would* be better to retire that phrase. "Calculus" implies some kind of single answer to the calculation.
"Choice and rejection" is not a math problem. It's a personal decision, albeit one that can -- should -- be informed by study and/or talking with a friend, guide, or other trusted person.
Felicific calculus - Wikipedia
Here's an interesting Humanist article from 2015 by Hiram Crespo that quotes Cassius, Onfray, and others:
This timeline seems significant too:
Chronology of early Christian monasticism - Wikipedia
and this
DeWitt posits that the early Christian monastic communities were patterned after the Epicurean Gardens in the ancient world.
I was just listening to a Bart Ehrman podcast and he brought up the Essenes in relation to a topic.
I'm not sure if DeWitt mentions them, but they were a Jewish ascetic community set off from others founded in the 2nd c. BCE.
It seems more likely to me that this would have been a model for early Christians than the Gardens, although I suppose there could have been a conflation of the two groups.
Thoughts?
Joshua 's video and Cassius 's "glass full/empty" metaphor are spot on. This is something I can never wrap my brain around. Why insist it's either/or?? By definition, if one side of the seesaw goes down, the other side goes up. By pursuing pleasure, we are, by definition, avoiding pain. As we reduce pain, we increase pleasure. "The feelings - pleasure and pain - are two." It's all a matter of focus or perspective, and sometimes one focus is helpful. Other times, the other focus is helpful.
we never set "avoiding pain" as the primary overriding purpose of life.
For the record, I agree.
No matter how much we think that the choice for the other person is "better," it's ultimately up to them what they choose to do.
Definitely. But that doesn't preclude the teacher from saying, "Told ya. Now, let's review what happened and how to avoid those consequences in the future."
Epicurus was not above evaluating other's choices and offering what one ought not do. He explicitly said "Therefore, whenever we say repeatedly that 'pleasure is the τέλος,' we do not say the pleasure of those who are prodigal like those who are ignorant, those who don't agree with us, or those who believe wrongly; but we mean that which neither pains the body nor troubles the mind. For it is not an endless string of drinking parties and festivals, and not taking advantage of slaves and women, nor does an extravagant table of fish and other things bring forth a sweet life but self-controlled reasoning and examining the cause of every choice and rejection and driving out the greatest number of opinions that take hold of the mind and bring confusion and trouble."
The whole idea of Epicurean teachers using frank speech to correct the actions of students and to guide them in a better direction is well documented.
there is no magic formula by which we can say that one persons view of pleasure is absolutely preferable over another person's view of pleasure. We're all entitled to our own choices, and we reap the rewards or pay the price accordingly.
While there's no "magic formula" and each person is responsible for the consequences of their choices, that doesn't imply there aren't better courses of actions or more preferable choices to make.
Epicurus could say each person chooses their own pleasure, but he was not above saying that this or that choice would not end well and guiding someone to make a "better" choice.
I'm fascinated by how rapidly the physics (motion) turns into an ethics issue (pleasure). A good demonstration of how they're inextricably linked.
Aristotle: Motion and its Place in Nature | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Not sure how much it helps, but it's a start.
I doubt I'll be much of a contributor
That was my initial intention 3 years ago. We encourage questions and whatever level of participation you feel comfortable with.
Welcome aboard!
