Posts by Don

One thing I'd like to share is that, according to Philodemus's On Piety, Epicurus enthusiastically took part in the festivals and rites of Athens. He may have had his own internal interpretation of them, but he didn't shy away from celebrating them.

I think that's a valuable lesson. We can take part wholeheartedly in traditional - even religious - celebrations of the season as long as we remember to leave the supernatural trappings behind - even if it's just by keeping it to ourselves.

If you enjoy carols or even the pomp and circumstance of a midnight mass or church service, go for it unreservedly.

We have an exemplar of our own in the "master architect of happiness" himself.

You're welcome to plan, but I'd advise against this. A weekly commitment is one of the reasons I'm taking a sabbatical from the podcast.

One of the things that makes the 20th special is the connection it gives us to our Philosophical ancestors. It is truly an Epicurean event. Diluting that with more online meetups makes me a little sad. Even the Sunday recording sessions started to feel like church (that's not a positive association btw).

Maybe we need a more "formal" agenda for the 20ths? Open up to more people? I like your number 4 above as a start. Plot out 20ths ahead of time? Epicurus's birthday is coming up too I believe. Jan 9 or 10 (7 Gamelion) https://www.hellenion.org/calendar/

https://www.epistemeacademy.org/calendars/yearly_calendar.html?ccyear=2022&vADBC=AD&CCode=Attic&day=274

https://www.jstor.org/stable/638331?mag=celebrating-solstice-the-ancient-greek-way&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

This was a new ancient Greek winter solstice festival for me.

Quote from Cassius

Sedley's "Epicurus and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom," a

Not to be pedantic, but it's Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. In case anyone is looking for the book.

Online Resources on Herculaneum Papyri | The Herculaneum Society

I realize these last few posts are not translations, but some at least have notations to which Herculaneum Papyri have fragments of On Nature in them. Then one could use those Papyri numbers to search for translations elsewhere. Those links also give a graphic image of how fragmentary some of these are!

Authors A-Z

Chartes - Papiri

I believe reason that the Epicureans emphasized both physical and mental pleasures was to clearly differentiate themselves from the Cyrenaics who, as I understand, didn't put any value on mental pleasures.

Epicurus: Fragments - translation

This link gives the fragments available at the time from the books of On Nature.

Hiram also laid out the Books as outlined in Les Epicuriens

And there's always Sedley's The Transformation of Greek Wisdom for the topics covered in each Book. I can't remember whether there are excerpts or not off-hand.

A big one

Epicurus, On nature, book 28

Epicurus, On nature, book 28

www.academia.edu

On Nature, Book 28

"Do Animals Have Freewill? Epicurus, On Nature XXV, 20 B and 20j Long–Sedley”,

The view of P. Huby and D. N. Sedley that animals according to Epicurus have freewill is discussed and rejected

www.academia.edu

Do Animals Have Free Will: On Nature, Book 25 excerpts

If we could get our hands on issues of the Cronache Ercolanesi (Herculaneum Chronicle)! https://cispe.org/cronache-ercolanesi/

Just read this today. Thought it might be applicable here:

Use the '20-5-3' Rule To Make Yourself Happier and Stronger

Americans spend 92 percent of their time indoors, and their physical and mental health are suffering. This three-number formula for how much time to spend in…

menshealth.com

Quote from Cassius

The implications of the different positions are not nearly as significant as would be divergences on more core issues, because none of us think that these gods are supernatural or intervene in human affairs or reward or punish either during life or thereafter, and those are the "big" issues.

Quote from Cassius

(1) Epicurus was very clear that gods are physical beings and that the type of beings he is discussing really exist;

Well, Sedley would disagree with you there as I understand his position.

Quote from Cassius

I realize that there are a lot of people, including some here, who think that Epicurean gods are simply mental constructs and that the don't really exist. That is not my position, because I think Epicurus was serious about what he wrote.

That would be me for one and I also think Epicurus was serious about what he wrote.

I'm getting these excerpts from my 80-page exploration of the letter to Menoikeus. It's almost ready to release as a *first draft* but I'll respond to the questions here since they're being asked:

123b begins the review of those elements of living nobly, beautifully, and virtuously.

123b. πρῶτον μὲν τὸν θεὸν ζῷον ἄφθαρτον καὶ μακάριον νομίζων, ὡς ἡ κοινὴ τοῦ θεοῦ νόησις ὑπεγράφη,

• μὲν can stand on its own, as here, in which case it can mean "so, whereas, and so" but it can also be left untranslated.
• The passage begins, appropriately enough, with πρῶτον (prōton) which literally means "first" but can also carry the idea of "primarily, foremost, most prominently, etc." So, Epicurus isn't just saying, "Okay, number one…" numerically but rather "This is important so I'm telling you this *first*!"
• The verb, νομίζων, comes last and means "believe, hold, consider." What are we to believe? We are to hold that: τὸν θεὸν ζῷον ἄφθαρτον καὶ μακάριον. So, what does that mean? Let's break it down.
• θεὸν is transliterated theon and is where English gets theology and atheist. τὸν θεὸν is singular, but, singular or plural, this can refer to a god, the gods, or the divine in general. However, David Sedley in his paper "Epicurus' Theological Innatism" https://www.academia.edu/resource/work/11365772 places significance on the singular construction. Sedley proposed each person creates their own "god" which is why he stressed the importance of the singular form. Sedley's paper is recommended reading. So, where the word is singular, I will try to translate it as such as to not obscure the semantics.

τὸν θεὸν ζῷον "a god (is a) ζῷον. But what is a ζῷον?

ζῷον (zōon) is where English zoology comes from.

LSJ gives two primary definitions:

• living being, animal
• in art, figure, image, not necessarily of animals (or a sign of the Zodiac)

So, unfortunately, at this point in the Letter we can't necessarily resolve the question of what the nature of the gods (or of a god) is according to Epicurus. Some scholars think Epicurus believed the gods were material beings ("living being, animal") somehow living between the various world-systems (cosmos) in the universe. Some think Epicurus believed the gods were mental representations or personifications of the concepts of blessedness ("figure, image, sign").

The Letter goes on to describe what kind of ζῷον a god is: ἄφθαρτον and μακάριον

The word Epicurus uses is εναργής.

It has two primary definitions:

1. visible, palpable, in bodily shape, properly of gods appearing in their own forms (in Homer); so of a dream or vision; ex., ἐναργὴς ταῦρος "in visible form a bull, a very bull"
2. manifest to the mind's eye, distinct

He can't mean the first since he's fairly adamant that the gods don't interact with humans. But the second definition coincides with his contention (and the idea of the prolepseis) that the gods are apprehended by the mind only. That also sets up a nice contrast with the first definition's use by Homer in describing the Olympian gods appearing "in visible form." Homer's gods were εναργής in one sense of the word; Epicurus's in the other sense.

The inscripion

Quote

I shall discuss folly shortly, the virtues and pleasure now. If, gentlemen, the point at issue between these people and us involved inquiry into «what is the means of happiness?» and they wanted to say «the virtues» (which would actually be true), it would be unnecessary to take any other step than to agree with them about this, without more ado. But since, as I say, the issue is not «what is the means of happiness?» but «what is happiness and what is the ultimate goal of our nature?», I say both now and always, shouting out loudly to all Greeks and non-Greeks, that pleasure is the end of the best mode of life, while the virtues, which are inopportunely messed about by these people (being transferred from the place of the means to that of the end), are in no way an end, but the means to the end. Let us therefore now state that this is true, making it our starting-point. Suppose, then, someone were to ask someone, though it is a naive question, «who is it whom these virtues benefit?», obviously the answer will be «man.» The virtues certainly do not make provision for these birds flying past, enabling them to fly well, or for each of the other animals: they do not desert the nature with which they live and by which they have been engendered; rather it is for the sake of this nature that the virtues do everything and exist. Each (virtue?) therefore ............... means of (?) ... just as if a mother for whatever reasons sees that the possessing nature has been summoned there, it then being necessary to allow the court to asked what each (virtue?) is doing and for whom .................................... [We must show] both which of the desires are natural and which are not; and in general all things that [are included] in the [former category are easily attained] .....

Quote from ayraj

My goal is to learn more from the primary writings, to read posts from others, and to learn to be an Epicurean. Because I've left a faith tradition, I'm also interested in any rituals or "best practices" anyone has for making Epicureanism a part of everyday life - kind of like how Christians pray, Buddhists meditate, or there are holidays to commemorate important holy days, etc., or even something simple like a home altar to reflect at. Not sure how much is in the purview of the Classical Epicurean perspective, but I truly am interested in being a student of Epicurus, Epicureanism, and in becoming a "devout" so-to-speak Epicurean.

Greetings, ayraj ! Thank you for sharing your background. I, too, find it an interesting exercise to look for "any rituals or "best practices" anyone has for making Epicureanism a part of everyday life." I need to go back and re-read (it's been awhile) The Ethics of Philodemus by Dr. Voula Tsouna, but there are some interesting practices that she talks about including "setting-before-the-eyes" to counteract or address one's anger (or other negative or harmful emotions). To me, the practice sounds like a vivid visualization in one's mind to really "see" the results of that emotion before one engages in it. That's a Cliffs Notes version.

The closest I've come to any daily or regular practice is to recite the Tetrapharmakos in ancient Greek to myself to try to keep the "basics" in mind. And made myself a keychain with SFOTSE (Sic fac omnia tamquam spectet Epicurus) which is (from Seneca's letters XXV.5) and means "Do all things as if Epicurus were watching." Sort of an Epicurean "WWJD: What would Jesus do."

As far as a home "altar," there is every precedent for having a bust of Epicurus. The are numerous files online for printing a small 3-D bust. I keep meaning to do this. Or maybe just a picture.

So, welcome to this little corner of the Epicurean internet! I look forward to reading any discoveries you make and questions you might have.

Well said!

Thanks, @Nate . That's a fascinating article.

How would you line up that with prolepseis or concepts? Epicurus certainly wouldn't have had instruments or observations at the 100ms scale, but I do think he got some things intuitively correct. Just curious about your take on the article.

I also think this intersects with Dr. Lisa Feldman Barrett's research. The idea of the brain needing to predict our actions is intriguing, makes sense when explained, and provides interesting parallels to Epicurus's philosophy.