Posts by Don

It's important to remember that parrhesia (frank speech) wasn't just used with philosophical adversaries or people the Epicureans disagreed with. According to Philodemus's work, it was a tool of instruction within the Epicurean community. If someone wasn't living up to their potential in putting the philosophy into practice in their life, the teachers would engage in frank speech to correct the student.

I keep meaning to read Voula Tsouna's The Ethics of Philodemus cover to cover which includes a section on this (and to try and get ahold of Philodemus's On Frank Speech). I've mostly used Tsouna's book to harvest citations and excerpts from Philodemus.

Quote from Cassius

I can hear Don thinking "this guy is the reincarnation of Norman deWitt!" Kind of an inside joke but can't resist making it

I can take a hint I agree with @smoothiekiwi that and think Christianity did - let's just go ahead and say it - stole and perverted some practices from the Epicureans. I just think DeWitt sees Epicureans hiding around EVERY Christian corner with the barest (or even absence) of evidence and in the process he dilutes his premise to the point of absurdity.

Too harsh?

No less an authority than Wikipedia gives one citation:

Quote

Caesar made numerous attempts to negotiate, at one point even conceding to give up all but one of his provinces and legions, allowing him to retain his immunity while diminishing his authority. This concession satisfied Pompey, but Cato, along with the consul Lentulus, refused to back down. Faced with the alternatives of returning to Rome for the inevitable trial and retiring into voluntary exile, Caesar crossed into Italy with only one legion, implicitly declaring war on the senate. Plutarch, Pompey , 59.4

Plutarch, Pompey, chapter 59, section 4

Quote from Cassius

IF IN FACT A BLISS DRUG WORKED THEN AN EPICUREAN WOULD CHOOSE IT!

Ad nauseum, I come to the exact OPPOSITE conclusion (in capital letters, too ). If you wanna reopen this can, I'll be happy to engage in a separate thread.

Quote from smoothiekiwi

Honestly a shame that this practice was lost to time, I would love to visit such a garden with a smiling Epicurean and a lot of good friends in it!

It wasn't "lost." We know what happened to it. We have the "Triumph" of Christianity to "thank" for it. I recommend Nixey's book The Darkening Age for that story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Darkening_Age?wprov=sfla1

According to the best attempt at an ancient Greek calendar to fit modern times that I've been able to find online, Epicurus's birthday of the 7th day in the month of Gamelion will fall this year on Monday, January 10.

So, this coming Monday, take a moment to remember the "master-builder of happiness" as Lucretius called him and dedicate yourself to the pursuit of pleasure in your life.

Quote from Diogenes Laertius, Book X.9

"For our philosopher has abundance of witnesses to attest his unsurpassed goodwill to all men--his native land, which honoured him with statues in bronze ; his friends, so many in number that they could hardly be counted by whole cities, and indeed all who knew him, held fast as they were by the siren-charms of his doctrine..."

Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, BOOK X, EPICURUS (341-271 B.C.)

So, the school of Epicurus was widespread and long-lived throughout the ancient world. In many ways, it could be called "evangelical" in the literal sense of "spreading the good news." However, I get the impression that there were NOT Epicurean" missionaries but rather it spread from individual to individual. Then, if a particularly wealthy Epicurean in a particular city was able to open their house or garden to others, that would start a Garden (κήπος kēpos) in that city to serve as a school and meeting place.

Quote from Cassius

her final two paragraphs

You do realize there's more article below those paragraphs, right?

Here's my take:

Quote

The wise one will not make fine speeches, (118) but will only give public readings upon request. (120) The wise one will not get caught up in political offices nor strive to be an absolute ruler, the ultimate political office. (119) Nor will they be a Cynic nor a beggar. (119) Nor will the wise one be anxious about their burial (118). Additionally, the wise one will set up statues but will be indifferent to ones being set up in their honor. (120) The sage will leave behind writings like prose works, treatises, and written speeches, but will not make celebratory speeches in the public assemblies. (120) The sage will be fond of the countryside, enjoying being outside the towns and cities. (120) The wise one will also pay just enough attention to their reputation as to avoid being looked down upon. (120) Even when drunk, the wise one will not talk nonsense or act silly. (119) Only the wise man will be competent to discuss music and poetry without writing poems of their own. (120) The sage will found a school, but not in a way that attracts a crowd around themselves or plays to the mob. (120)

I would even speculate where a desire falls in those categories can be contextual and dependent on circumstances at any given time, too.

Ah! The phrase used in those is οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀναγκαῖαι "they are not necessary." So, the word unnecessary isn't there, but it is explicitly said "they are not necessary." Mea culpa.

I find it interesting that Epicurus didn't actually use the word "unnecessary" although one could argue it's implied. But it is not explicit:

Quote

Furthermore, on the one hand, there are the natural desires; on the other, the 'empty, fruitless, or vain ones.' And of the natural ones, on the one hand, are the necessary ones; on the other, the ones which are only natural; then, of the necessary ones: on the one hand, those necessary for eudaimonia; then, those necessary for the freedom from disturbance for the body; then those necessary for life itself.

Unless he talked about the division of desires somewhere else and used "unnecessary" explicitly. I certainly don't have the texts memorized

To circle back to the topic of this thread, addictions are not predicated on empty desires. It would seem to me that most addictions start out as natural but unnecessary desires. In fact, I would posit that most of our everyday desires fall into the "natural but not necessary" category, but they do add variety to our lives.

Quote from Cassius

Maybe our lexicon or FAQ ought to include a list of actual or probable Epicurean "idioms"

If we're going that route, my suggestion would be to have an entry for "Empty" Desires and then make a point of saying "this is the word Epicurus used to describe desires which..." I don't think we should shy away from his modifier but understand it may need some context. I maintain it's a good word and gets at the unsatisfying nature of the empty desires, like "empty" calories, empty handed, empty headed, etc.

Quote from Cassius

Don I presume this ("entirely in vain") is pretty much the same sentiment we are discussing? If so maybe we can find some points of comparison with the Latin from this section.

The alternative translation just has "have come to nothing" which is comparable to "in vain" but even better, from my perspective, since it also equates to "empty" (nothing). The applicable Latin appears to be nullas: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?do…Aentry%3Dnullus.

Maybe desires that come to nothing instead of "empty" desires?

[60] accedit etiam mors, quae quasi saxum Tantalo semper impendet,1 tum superstitio, qua qui est imbutus2 quietus esse numquam potest. praeterea bona praeterita non meminerunt, praesentibus non fruuntur, futura modo expectant, quae quia certa esse non possunt, conficiuntur3 et angore et metu maximeque cruciantur, cum sero sentiunt frustra se aut pecuniae studuisse aut imperiis aut opibus aut gloriae. nullas enim consequuntur voluptates, quarum potiendi spe inflammati multos labores magnosque susceperant.

Alternate translation:

Moreover, there is death, the stone of Tantalus ever hanging over men's heads; and superstition, that poisons and destroys all peace of mind. Besides, they do not recollect their past nor enjoy their present blessings; they merely look forward to those of the future, and as these are of necessity uncertain, they are consumed with agony and terror; and the climax of their torment is when they perceive too late that all their dreams of wealth or station, power or fame, have come to nothing. For they never attain any of the pleasures, the hope of which inspired them to undergo all their arduous toils.

LacusCurtius • Cicero — De Finibus, Book I

Honestly, I still like "empty."

Plus, I would say a desire for power only for power's sake is always empty.

A desire for money only for money's sake is always empty.

A desire for fame only for fame's sake is always empty.

Those desires cannot be fulfilled and will end in frustration or, at least, a neverending quest to fulfill them.

But, for example, a desire for enough money to achieve a goal is finite and achievable.

Points taken, Cassius .

I like @Nate 's "vacuous."

Cogitating further. More thoughts to come eventually.

Thanks, Nate, for your responses! You are more passionate and articulate than I was.

Quote from Nate

While he re-defines "pleasure", it was not such a drastic leap for the Hellenistic mind to make

Before anyone else comments on your comment above, I, too, think Epicurus "re-defined" (or clarified, I might say) the word "pleasure" to include biological homeostasis, namely ataraxia and aponia, specifically as pleasure. Other philosophers of his time posited that there was a neutral state between pleasure and pain. My thought is that Epicurus specifically says "no, when you're feeling in balance, your body's working well, your mind is untroubled, that is a pleasure."