Posts by Don

Quote from Kalosyni

"Should someone who studies Epicurean philosophy also include the study of modern psychology and implement evidence based "self-help" and positive psychology"?

I agree that there's not an ultimatum to or prohibition against the study as Pacatus 's last sentence states.

However, Kalosyni , I think you've hit the nail on the head by using "evidence based." If a technique or practice is shown to increase happiness or enhance gratitude in keeping with Epicurus' philosophy, I certainly see no reason to not take advantage of it if it resonates with someone.

ADMIN EDIT BY CASSIUS 05-29-26: Don set up this thread initially, and I think him for bringing this to our attention. As the thread has grown in scope i am updating the title to reflect that this thread will be devoted to the ongoing discussion of the Gedney blog. As such, a number of different substack articles will be referenced here. The best understanding of the flow will come from following the discussion from start to finish rather than trying to set up new threads for separate substack articles as they occur. It will be appreciated here that if posters mean to reference only a single article that they include a link to that article in their respective threads.

Scholar Spotlight: Tim O’Keefe

Don't take it from me: good work on Epicurean ethics

open.substack.com

Not sure who Jack Gedney is, but this new Substack account looks worth following. He likes Emily Austin's book and references Dewitt.

Quote from Diogenes quoted by Pacatus

“ … and not least we did [this] for those who (II) are called foreigners, although they are not really so. For, while the various segments of the earth give different people a different country, the whole compass of this world gives all people a single country, the entire earth, and a single home, the world.” [My italics]

For anyone interested... ...κ̣αλουμέν̣ους μὲν ξένους, ο̣ὐ μήν γε ὄντας. ⁦ (vac. 1)⁩ καθ̣' ἑκάστην μὲν γὰρ ἀποτομὴν τῆς γῆς ἄλλων ἄλλη πατρίς ἐστιν, ⁦ (vac. 1) κατὰ δὲ τὴν̣ ὅλην περιοχὴν το̣ῦ̣δε τοῦ κόσμου μία̣ ̣π̣άντων πατρίς ἐστ̣ιν ἡ πᾶσα γῆ καὶ εἷς ὁ κόσμος οἶκος.

• foreigners = ξένους (xenous)
• earth= γῆς (gēs, form of γη = earth, including land and sea; from which we get geo- as in geography)
• world= κόσμου (kosmou, ie cosmos)
• country = πατρίς patris, literally "the place of one's father/ancestors"
• home = οἶκος oikos

I find it interesting that Diogenes distinguishes between the earth γης and the cosmos κοσμου.

Welcome aboard!

Quote from Cassius

Of course when the Terminators take over they may not agree

I fully realize that this is going to come off as harsh, but I was off work today with sinus issues, sneezes, aches, and coughs and maybe my inhibitions are a little less than usual. Please take that as context, but with that said...

I'm sorry, but this is a prime example of the reason I despise AI summaries. It looks all authoritative with words like aphoristic length and presented in a bulleted list, but it's all an LLM predicting what word comes next and extruding it out for human consumption.

The "references" include posts I've made on this very forum that don't really say what the AI summary is trying to make them say: Presenting the Principal Doctrines in Narrative Form

The references also include papers/articles on Bible versification, which is not exactly a direct comparison. And Bible verses are also notorious for breaking across chapter lines or breaking up a thought:

https://thebiblebistro.com/episode/breaking-bad-paragraphs/

Purpose: Chapters and verses were added to make referencing easier (e.g., John 3:16), but they can sometimes disrupt the text’s flow.

The AI summary also makes mention of the 40 doctrines, and I've personally found (at my referenced post) both 40 and earlier 44 "doctrines" that break in very different places:

Post

RE: Presenting the Principal Doctrines in Narrative Form

https://archive.org/details/bub_gb…ge/465/mode/1up

German, 1806, with 44 Principal Doctrines ?

Don

June 21, 2023 at 8:22 PM

Post

RE: Presenting the Principal Doctrines in Narrative Form

Okay, this was VERY interesting. I used the 1739 Greek with Latin translation to compare with the text at Perseus Digital Library:

1739: https://hdl.handle.net/2027/nnc1.0021…7768674761-1400

Perseus Greek (DL, Book 10): http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?do…0%3Achapter%3D1

Perseus English (DL, Book 10): http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?do…0%3Achapter%3D1

I used the Greek text to compare with each other since 1739 had 44 Principal Doctrines and Perseus (i.e., Hicks, 1972) had the…

Don

June 22, 2023 at 12:06 AM

So, it's a game of "Spot the Doctrine" with different results with, in my opinion, neither being right or wrong. It's overlaid on the text.

I can see Epicurus or whoever wrote Kyriai Doxai writing in smaller digestible chunks for easier memorization. I gladly admit that there are short sections that are apparent when reading the topics covered, but there is nothing to the best of my knowledge that confirms there are meant to be 40 separate doctrines in the book.

In my further opinion, reading them in conversation with each other within a particular topic rather than in isolation, provides additional context leading to a fuller picture of what's being conveyed. Trying to puzzle out things like "What does this Principal Doctrine mean?" is fraught with unnecessary difficulty if only one reads a few before or a few after or both.

PS. I need to add that I remain open to research on where the "breaks" happen to be in Principal Doctrines. But the arbitrary 40 isn't really helpful in that quest in my opinion.

Quote from Bryan

I agree with you, Cassius. I will parenthetically add that Epicurus does use all of these terms below, and it is clear that they are "grades" or "rankings" of one's advancement, but I doubt the divisions were very formalized.

Do you have the citations/references for those? I'm curious to check them out.

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Don

As I've said ad nauseum in the past, the Principal Doctrines were not originally verified.

Far be it for me to question anyone's typing but perhaps you meant a word other than "verified"?

Thanks! Fixed.

Going back to the original purpose of this thread: the meaning of PD25:

As I've said ad nauseum in the past, the Principal Doctrines were not originally "versified" into separate Doctrines. It was one text, granted covering a number of topics but not in distinct #1, #2, etc. This being the case, we can't necessarily read "PD25" in isolation. I will contend that we could read the whole way from "PD16" through "PD26" as a whole and each section builds in the other (Saint-Andre translation with some edits, ex. S-A "joy" = ἡδονὴν hēdonēn "pleasure". I've made that change below). For example, the idea of using reason and not relying on chance comes up several times. Thoughts?

***

Chance steals only a bit into the life of a wise person: for throughout the complete span of his life the greatest and most important matters have been, are, and will be directed by the power of reason. One who acts aright is utterly steady and serene, whereas one who goes astray is full of trouble and confusion. As soon as the pain produced by the lack of something is removed, pleasure in the flesh is not increased but only embellished. Yet the limit of enjoyment in the mind is produced by thinking through these very things and similar things, which once provoked the greatest fears in the mind. Finite time and infinite time contain the same amount of pleasure, if its limits are measured out through reasoning. The flesh assumes that the limits of pleasure are infinite, and that infinite pleasure can be produced only through infinite time. But the mind, thinking through the goal and limits of the flesh and dissolving fears about eternity, produces a complete way of life (τὸν παντελῆ βίον) and therefore has no need of infinite time; yet the mind does not flee from pleasure, nor when events cause it to exit from life does it look back as if it has missed any aspect of the best life. 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 (τὸ τὸν ὅλον βίον παντελῆ) ; so that there is no need for the things that are achieved through struggle. You must reflect on the fundamental goal and everything that is clear, to which opinions are referred; if you do not, all will be full of trouble and confusion. If you fight against all your perceptions, you will have nothing to refer to in judging those which you declare to be false. If you reject a perception outright and do not distinguish between your opinion about what will happen after, what came before, your feelings, and all the layers of imagination involved in your thoughts, then you will throw your other perceptions into confusion because of your trifling opinions; as a result, you will reject the very criterion of truth. And if when forming concepts from your opinions you treat as confirmed everything that will happen and what you do not witness thereafter, then you will not avoid what is false, so that you will remove all argument and all judgment about what is and is not correct. If at all critical times you do not connect each of your actions to the natural goal of life, but instead turn too soon to some other kind of goal in thinking whether to avoid or pursue something, then your thoughts and your actions will not be in harmony. The desires that do not bring pain when they go unfulfilled are not necessary; indeed they are easy to reject if they are hard to achieve or if they seem to produce harm.

(NOTE: It's not necessarily the most fluid prose, and I would bet the text has been through numerous hands on its way to us; but I still contend it hangs together.)

Quote from wbernys

Quote from Don

There may not be many instances of the word ataraxia but terms similar to or derived from it show up in numerous places in the extant texts:

Way to make me feel unlearned lol. It seems it is a bigger deal than i let on.

Don't sweat it. That was a labor of love delving into the Greek. Translation masks a number of similar words that are there in the original.

Quote from wbernys

Side note: I kind of agree with Cassius that Epicurus didn't consider Ataraxia a major term in his philosophy or anything. He only used it a few times and i don't think we should imagine them as the most important terms in his philosophy.

There may not be many instances of the word ataraxia but terms similar to or derived from it show up in numerous places in the extant texts:

From a post of mine from 2023:

I am starting this thread to compile a list of every time the words Ataraxia, Eudaemonia, and Tranquiitas appear in a core Epicurean text...

February 19, 2023

ΑΤΑΡΑΞΙΑ (Ataraxia and related terms: Note that αταραξια is literally "ataraksia" even though the usual English spelling is "ataraxia." Therefore, words that have atarak- are directly related.

From ἀ- (a-, “not”) +‎ ταράσσω (tarássō, “trouble, disturb”) +‎ -ῐ́ᾱ (-íā); Antonyms: τᾰρᾰχή (tarakhḗ)

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἀτα^ρ-αξία

PD17 One who acts aright is utterly steady and serene, whereas one who goes astray is full of trouble and confusion. (Peter Saint-Andre)

ὁ δίκαιος ἀταρακτότατος, ὁ δʼ ἄδικος πλείστης ταραχῆς γήμων.

NOTE: ἀταρακτότατος means "utterly without disturbance" and by extension steady or serene, whereas πλείστης ταραχῆς means full of trouble, disorder, or tumult (expanded here to "full of trouble and confusion"; see also PD22

***

VS79 He who is as peace within himself also causes no trouble for others. (Peter Saint-Andre)

ὁ ἀτάραχος ἑαυτῷ καὶ ἑτέρῳ ἀόχλητος.

***

Fragment 519. The greatest fruit of justice is serenity.

δικαιοσύνης καρπὸς μέγιστος ἀταραξία.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus (DL 10.53; Hicks via Perseus): "Again, we must believe that smelling,81 like hearing, would produce no sensation, were there not particles conveyed from the object which are of the proper sort for exciting the organ of smelling, some of one sort, some of another, some exciting it confusedly and strangely, others quietly and agreeably.

"Καὶ μὴν καὶ τὴν ὀσμὴν νομιστέον, ὥσπερ καὶ τὴν ἀκοὴν οὐκ ἄν ποτε οὐθὲν πάθος ἐργάσασθαι, εἰ μὴ ὄγκοι τινὲς ἦσαν ἀπὸ τοῦ πράγματος ἀποφερόμενοι σύμμετροι πρὸς τοῦτο τὸ αἰσθητήριον κινεῖν, οἱ μὲν τοῖοι τεταραγμένως καὶ ἀλλοτρίως, οἱ δὲ τοῖοι ἀταράχως καὶ οἰκείως ἔχοντες.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus (DL 10.80; Hicks via Perseus): [80] we must not suppose that our treatment of these matters fails of accuracy, so far as it is needful to ensure our tranquillity and happiness (Don Note: lit. blessedness "makarion" - same word used for the gods). When, therefore, we investigate the causes of celestial and atmospheric phenomena, as of all that is unknown, we must take into account the variety of ways in which analogous occurrences happen within our experience ; while as for those who do not recognize the difference between what is or comes about from a single cause and that which may be the effect of any one of several causes, overlooking the fact that the objects are only seen at a distance, and are moreover ignorant of the conditions that render, or do not render, peace of mind impossible --all such persons we must treat with contempt. If then we think that an event could happen in one or other particular way out of several, we shall be as tranquil when we recognize that it actually comes about in more ways than one as if we knew that it happens in this particular way.

[80] οὐ δεῖ νομίζειν τὴν ὑπὲρ τούτων χρείαν ἀκρίβειαν μὴ ἀπειληφέναι, ὅση πρὸς τὸ ἀτάραχον καὶ μακάριον ἡμῶν συντείνει. ὥστε παραθεωροῦντας ποσαχῶς παρ᾽ ἡμῖν τὸ ὅμοιον γίνεται, αἰτιολογητέον ὑπέρ τε τῶν μετεώρων καὶ παντὸς τοῦ ἀδήλου, καταφρονοῦντας τῶν οὔτε τὸ μοναχῶς ἔχον ἢ γινόμενον γνωριζόντων οὔτε τὸ πλεοναχῶς συμβαῖνον, τὴν ἐκ τῶν ἀποστημάτων φαντασίαν παριδόντων,121 ἔτι τε ἀγνοούντων καὶ ἐν ποίοις οὐκ ἐστιν ἀταρακτῆσαι <καὶ ἐν ποίοις ὁμοίως ἀταρακτῆσαι.>122 ἂν οὖν οἰώμεθα καὶ ὡδί πως ἐνδεχόμενον αὐτὸ γίνεσθαι, αὐτὸ τὸ ὅτι πλεοναχῶς γίνεται γνωρίζοντες, ὥσπερ κἂν ὅτι ὡδί πως γίνεται εἴδωμεν, ἀταρακτήσομεν.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus (DL 10.82; Hicks via Perseus): [82] But mental tranquillity means being released from all these troubles and cherishing a continual remembrance of the highest and most important truths.

[82] ἡ δὲ ἀταραξία τὸ τούτων πάντων ἀπολελύσθαι καὶ συνεχῆ μνήμην ἔχειν τῶν ὅλων καὶ κυριωτάτων.

***

Epicurs, Letter to Pythocles (DL 10.85; Hicks via Perseus): "In the first place, remember that, like everything else, knowledge of celestial phenomena, whether taken along with other things or in isolation, has no other end in view than peace of mind and firm conviction.

"Πρῶτον μὲν οὖν μὴ ἄλλο τι τέλος ἐκ τῆς περὶ μετεώρων γνώσεως εἴτε κατὰ συναφὴν λεγομένων εἴτε αὐτοτελῶς νομίζειν εἶναι ἤπερ ἀταραξίαν καὶ πίστιν βέβαιον, καθάπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν λοιπῶν.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Pythocles (DL 10.96; Hicks via Perseus): [96] For in all the celestial phenomena such a line of research is not to be abandoned ; for, if you fight against clear evidence, you never can enjoy genuine peace of mind.

[96] ἐπὶ πάντων γὰρ τῶν μετεώρων τὴν τοιαύτην ἴχνευσιν152 οὐ προετέον. ἢν γάρ τις ᾖ μαχόμενος τοῖς ἐναργήμασιν, οὐδέποτε δυνήσεται ἀταραξίας γνησίου μεταλαβεῖν.

***

Epicurus, On Choices and Avoidances (DL10.136; Hicks revised slightly by Don to be more literal, via Perseus): And Epicurus in his work On Choice states in this manner: "Peace of mind and freedom from pain are pleasures which imply a state of rest ; joy and delight are seen to consist in motion and activity."

ὁ δ᾽ Ἐπίκουρος ἐν τῷ Περὶ αἱρέσεων οὕτω λέγει: "ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἀταραξία καὶ ἀπονία καταστηματικαί εἰσιν ἡδοναί: ἡ δὲ χαρὰ καὶ ἡ εὐφροσύνη κατὰ κίνησιν ἐνεργείᾳ βλέπονται."

***

Epicurus, Letter to Menoikeus 128 ( Don translation):

[128] The steady contemplation of these things equips one to know how to decide all choice and rejection for the health of the body and for the tranquility of the mind* since this is the goal of a blessed life.

[128] τούτων γὰρ ἀπλανὴς θεωρία πᾶσαν αἵρεσιν καὶ φυγὴν ἐπανάγειν οἶδεν ἐπὶ τὴν τοῦ σώματος ὑγίειαν καὶ τὴν <τῆς ψυχῆς> ἀταραξίαν, ἐπεὶ τοῦτο τοῦ μακαρίως ζῆν ἐστι τέλος.

*NOTE: I added the parenthetical phrase "that is for our physical and our mental existence," at this point in my translation to clarify and paraphrase the previous phrases.

***

I would also include citations to γαληνίζω (galēnizō) and related terms as synonyms for ataraxia:

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus (DL 10.37): [37] "Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this"

37] "Ὅθεν δὴ πᾶσι χρησίμης οὔσης τοῖς ᾠκειωμένοις φυσιολογίᾳ τῆς τοιαύτης ὁδοῦ, παρεγγυῶν τὸ συνεχὲς ἐνέργημα ἐν φυσιολογίᾳ καὶ τοιούτῳ μάλιστα ἐγγαληνίζων τῷ βίῳ ἐποίησά σοι ...

ἐγγαληνίζω τῷ βίῳ, "spend life calmly" from γαληνίζω

A.calm, still, esp. waves or winds, Hp.Vict.3.71, E.Fr.1079.

2. intr., become calm, prob. in Hp. Morb.Sacr.13; to be calm or tranquil, Alex.178.6, Ph.1.354; “τὸ γαληνίζον τῆς θαλάττης” Arist.Pr.936a5:—so in Med., Xenocr. ap. Orib.2.58.98.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus (DL 10.83, last line of the letter):

"It is of such a sort that those who are already tolerably, or even perfectly, well acquainted with the details can, by analysis of what they know into such elementary perceptions as these, best prosecute their researches in physical science as a whole ; while those, on the other hand, who are not altogether entitled to rank as mature students can in silent fashion and as quick as thought run over the doctrines most important for their peace of mind."

"Τοιαῦτα γάρ ἐστιν, ὥστε καὶ τοὺς κατὰ μέρος ἤδη ἐξακριβοῦντας ἱκανῶς ἢ καὶ τελείως, εἰς τὰς τοιαύτας ἀναλύοντας ἐπιβολάς, τὰς πλείστας τῶν περιοδειῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς ὅλης φύσεως ποιεῖσθαι: ὅσοι δὲ μὴ παντελῶς τῶν ἀποτελουμένων εἰσίν, ἐκ τούτων καὶ κατὰ τὸν ἄνευ φθόγγων τρόπον τὴν ἅμα νοήματι περίοδον τῶν κυριωτάτων πρὸς γαληνισμὸν ποιοῦνται."

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, γα^λην-ισμός

***

It would also be instructive to include variations on the word ταραχή (tarakhē; "trouble", "disorder", or "tumult") since that forms the root of ataraxia ("no trouble", "no disorder", or "no tumult")

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, τα^ρα^χή

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus. (DL 10.77): [77] For troubles and anxieties and feelings of anger and partiality do not accord with bliss, but always imply weakness and fear and dependence upon one's neighbours. Nor, again, must we hold that things which are no more than globular masses of fire, being at the same time endowed with bliss, assume these motions at will. Nay, in every term we use we must hold fast to all the majesty which attaches to such notions as bliss and immortality, lest the terms should generate opinions inconsistent with this majesty. Otherwise such inconsistency will of itself suffice to produce the worst disturbance in our minds. Hence, where we find phenomena invariably recurring, the invariableness of the recurrence must be ascribed to the original interception and conglomeration of atoms whereby the world was formed.

[77] ἀφθαρσίας ῾οὐ γὰρ συμφωνοῦσιν πραγματεῖαι καὶ φροντίδες καὶ ὀργαὶ καὶ χάριτες μακαριότητι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ καὶ φόβῳ καὶ προσδεήσει τῶν πλησίον ταῦτα γίγνεταἰ, μήτε αὖ πυρὸς ἀνάμματα συνεστραμμένου τὴν μακαριότητα κεκτημένα κατὰ βούλησιν τὰς κινήσεις ταύτας λαμβάνειν: ἀλλὰ πᾶν τὸ σέμνωμα τηρεῖν, κατὰ πάντα ὀνόματα φερόμενον ἐπὶ τὰς τοιαύτας ἐννοίας, ἵνα μηδ᾽ ὑπεναντίαι ἐξ αὐτῶν <γένωνται> τῷ σεμνώματι δόξαι: εἰ δὲ μή, τὸν μέγιστον τάραχον ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς αὐτὴ ἡ ὑπεναντιότης παρασκευάσει. ὅθεν δὴ κατὰ τὰς ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐναπολήψεις τῶν συστροφῶν τούτων ἐν τῇ τοῦ κόσμου γενέσει δεῖ δοξάζειν καὶ τὴν ἀνάγκην ταύτην καὶ περίοδον συντελεῖσθαι.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus. (DL 10.78):

"Ἔτι τε οὐ τὸ πλεοναχῶς ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἐνδεχόμενον καὶ ἄλλως πως ἔχειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἁπλῶς μὴ εἶναι ἐν ἀφθάρτῳ καὶ μακαρίᾳ φύσει τῶν διάκρισιν ὑποβαλλόντων ἢ τάραχον μηθέν: καὶ τοῦτο καταλαβεῖν τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔστιν ἁπλῶς εἶναι.

"Further, we must recognize on such points as this no plurality of causes or contingency, but must hold that nothing suggestive of conflict or disquiet is compatible with an immortal and blessed nature. And the mind can grasp the absolute truth of this.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus. (DL 10.81): [81] "There is yet one more point to seize, namely, that the greatest anxiety of the human mind arises through the belief that the heavenly bodies are blessed and indestructible, and that at the same time they have volitions and actions and causality inconsistent with this belief ; and through expecting or apprehending some everlasting evil, either because of the myths, or because we are in dread of the mere insensibility of death, as if it had to do with us ; and through being reduced to this state not by conviction but by a certain irrational perversity, so that, if men do not set bounds to their terror, they endure as much or even more intense anxiety than the man whose views on these matters are quite vague.

[81] "Ἐπὶ δὲ τούτοις ὅλως ἅπασιν ἐκεῖνο δεῖ κατανοεῖν, ὅτι τάραχος ὁ κυριώτατος ταῖς ἀνθρωπίναις ψυχαῖς γίνεται ἐν τῷ ταῦτά τε μακάρια δοξάζειν <εἶναι> καὶ ἄφθαρτα, καὶ ὑπεναντίας ἔχειν τούτῳ βουλήσεις ἅμα καὶ πράξεις καὶ αἰτίας, καὶ ἐν τῷ αἰώνιόν τι δεινὸν ἀεὶ προσδοκᾶν ἢ ὑποπτεύειν κατὰ τοὺς μύθους εἴ τε καὶ αὐτὴν τὴν ἀναισθησίαν τὴν ἐν τῷ τεθνάναι φοβουμένους ὥσπερ οὖσαν κατ᾽ αὐτούς, καὶ ἐν τῷ μὴ δόξαις ταῦτα πάσχειν ἀλλ᾽ ἀλόγῳ γέ τινι παραστάσει, ὅθεν μὴ ὁρίζοντας τὸ δεινὸν τὴν ἴσην ἢ καὶ ἐπιτεταμένην ταραχὴν λαμβάνειν τῷ εἰκαίως δοξάζοντι ταῦτα:

(NOTE: This directly precedes section DL 10.82 cited above and below.)

***

Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus. (DL 10.82): For by studying them we shall rightly trace to its cause and banish the source of disturbance and dread, accounting for celestial phenomena and for all other things which from time to time befall us and cause the utmost alarm to the rest of mankind.

ἂν γὰρ τούτοις προσέχωμεν, τὸ ὅθεν ὁ τάραχος καὶ ὁ φόβος ἐγίνετο ἐξαιτιολογήσομεν ὀρθῶς καὶ ἀπολύσομεν, ὑπέρ τε μετεώρων αἰτιολογοῦντες καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν τῶν ἀεὶ παρεμπιπτόντων, ὅσα φοβεῖ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἐσχάτως.

***

Epicurus, Letter to Menoikeus, (DL 10.131, Don translation):

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.

Ὅταν οὖν λέγωμεν ἡδονὴν τέλος ὑπάρχειν, οὐ τὰς τῶν ἀσώτων ἡδονὰς καὶ τὰς ἐν ἀπολαύσει κειμένας λέγομεν, ὥς τινες ἀγνοοῦντες καὶ οὐχ ὁμολογοῦντες ἢ κακῶς ἐκδεχόμενοι νομίζουσιν, ἀλλὰ τὸ μήτε ἀλγεῖν κατὰ σῶμα μήτε ταράττεσθαι κατὰ ψυχήν·

***

PD22 (Peter Saint-Andre) You must reflect on the fundamental goal and everything that is clear, to which opinions are referred; if you do not, all will be full of trouble and confusion.

τὸ ὑφεστηκὸς δεῖ τέλος ἐπιλογίζεσθαι καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ἐνάργειαν, ἐφʼ ἣν τὰ δοξαζόμενα ἀνάγομεν· εἰ δὲ μὴ πάντα ἀκρισίας καὶ ταραχῆς ἔσται μεστά.

NOTE: Here the translated phrase "trouble and confusion" reflects the Greek words ἀκρισία (literally "indistinctness") and ταραχή (literally "trouble", "disorder", or "tumult"); see also Principal Doctrine #17 and the note thereto.

***

NOTE: This is not necessarily an exhaustive list as the writings of Philodemus and Metrodorus may yield more citations, but they are not as readily searched as the sources above.

Quote from wbernys

we in fact are completely free from pain quite often,

LOL I know that I'm never completely free from pain. Maybe I'm overgeneralizing though. There's always a twinge, ache, etc, somewhere in my body or mind. Now, if I try, I can ignore them for a bit. If I'm engrossed in a task or engaged in an activity that keeps my attention focused, I suppose I can feel like I'm pain free.... and is that the same of "completely free from pain" if I'm not consciously aware of any pain? I suppose, may be.

I need to check -- and if someone has the citations, please share -- does Epicurus use "freedom from pain" or rather "complete freedom from pain"? I honestly can't remember.

NOTE: I added the post below from me in 2023 to provide context and citations. I thought I remembered doing something like that and found it.

The discussion about mental and physical pain brings us right back around to ataraxia and aponia all over again.

As time has gone on, I have come to a (semi-firm) belief that ataraxia is not about rooting out every single disturbing fear and anxiety of every variety. To me, ataraxia is about rooting out the existential dread of fear of the gods, of death, of post-death punishment, and similar unfounded fears and anxieties. Ripping out these fears and anxieties leaves behind a rock solid foundation of calm tranquility when it comes to the big questions of life, and once that foundation is laid, it is permanent -- IF you've truly internalized it! If it's merely an intellectual acknowledgement like "yeah yeah no need to fear gods. Death is nothing. We all get that. Okay, got it" it could come back in times of stress and hardship. You have to KNOW IT, in your bones, when waking and sleeping.

It's a similar case for aponia, but I'm still working out the details of that. I don't think it means what we usually think it means. But I'll get back to you on the specifics.

Quote from Cassius

But back to the more basic and at the same time more urgent point to be clear about: Happiness, which is what Epicurus says we do everything to obtain, does not require complete absence of pain.

Are we agreed on that?

Agreed, because as mortal beings we can never be completely free from every pain, mental or physical.

Quote from wbernys

Quote from Cassius

And yet on the last day of his life Epicurus considered himself happy / and/or considered it to be among his happiest days despite his excruciating pain.

How would you reconcile that?

He never says it is among the happiest days of his life, he simply says it's a blissful/happy day and that he sets gladness of the mind towards past conversations, this allows him to have more pleasure than pain with the mind offsetting the pains of the flesh.

Exactly. Τὴν μακαρίαν... καὶ ἅμα τελευταίαν ἡμέραν τοῦ βίου "The blissful land at the same time last day of my life"

I've only caught up reading part way but I'll wade in here.

I really don't care whether we talk about psychological hedonism or hedonism or whatever.

What I come back to is that Epicurus said living creatures pursue pleasure and flee from pain. Stop.

That's why pleasure is the telos. It is the thing to which all our actions and decisions terminate. Ask enough questions, drill deep enough, and everyone should/has to admit that the reason they did something was it thought it would make them feel good, it would bring pleasure. One can obfuscate, use fancy virtue-laden rhetoric, lie to oneself and others consciously or subconsciously. The result is the same. Epicurus calls us to pursue pleasure consciously and deliberately and to question our decisions in light of this guide that Nature has provided. Culture and society provide innumerable avenues that claim to provide us with pleasure or dictate what we "should" do. Epicurus calls us to question our culture's "that's the way things are done."

Y'all have been active! I need to catch up on my lunch hour!

Quote from Godfrey

everyone pursues nature's end

I would argue that everyone pursues what they believe will bring them pleasure, will provide happiness. It's just that sometimes - often - we fool ourselves into pursuing those things that will not in reality bring pleasure in the long run.

Quote from Godfrey

I for one spent years pursuing my "duty", and all it gave me was a life of misery.

In reference to this, why did you pursue "duty"? If you really drill down honestly, I would suggest that if you keep asking yourself "why did I do that?" and keep asking it at every step, you may eventually get to something like "because if I didn't do it, it would have caused me pain. If I hadn't 'done my duty' I would have felt guilt and other painful feelings."

I do not want this to seem combative. I've done this to decisions of my own and have come to similar conclusions.

Quote from Godfrey

I would say that the consequences of using reason to override nature's end in all likelihood will be an abundance of pain.

That is very well said, and I agree with that! It strikes me as almost a textbook definition of following an empty desire.

Quote from Godfrey

Being unaware of nature's end may lead to the same result.

I think we a humans can rationalize almost any action, but we can't escape that we pursue pleasure and flee pain. The problem is few of us pursue pleasure well or that we try to fool ourselves into what the best path to pleasure and well-being is.

Quote from Godfrey

To me, Epicurus is saying to "walk the talk."

I don't disagree with that. The talk is going to reinforce the walk, and vice versa.

Yes. I agree with that.

Quote from wbernys

Don just to be clear. Do you and i agree on this inerpreation. I thought you disagreed but now it seems like you and have the same idea. Just wanna be sure.

I think I'm becoming confused (the "joys" of posting vs having a conversation).

Could you say one more time what is "this interpretation"?