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
the smashed-version Epicurus bust (which I detest when people use rather than the many perfectly-good alternate versions that are available)
I would agree there are better alternatives, but in some ways I like the broken one as a metaphor for Epicurus has taken a beating but he's still standing, 2,000+ years on. "Bring it on! I can take it!"
I found another video where the author defends Epicurus and his philosophy against a host calling Epicurus "the worst philosopher". I haven't watched it all yet, but it seems to start strong:
I see the guest is coming out with a new book:
https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250454256/theartofenough/
This thread had flown under my radar, so I was curious to check out its Amazon page:
Best Sellers Rank
Not exactly burning up the charts, even in the niche categories. Good.
And this line, evidently from the book, made me both 
and 
:
In his own time, Epicurus was a fringe thinker. He and his few followers speculated...
One of the pre-eminent schools in the ancient world that had a lineage stretching directly from Epicurus for centuries and had a presence stretching from Gaul to Asia Minor described as "fringe" and a few followers?? Disingenuous and mendacious that seems to me.
I think I'd entertain the idea of "sweetness", as in, "the sweet life" or "living sweetly". It also compliments the gastronomical approach of the Epicurean school. I might also consider "delight" and "delights", but both of those import their own, cultural nuances.
Nice post. The inadequacy of translation is always going to dog us, although I usually advocate for multiple words in English to try to convey some of the nuance as opposed to using Greek untranslated.
Maybe the goal is a sweet, pleasant life after all.
Pleasure is The Supreme Good to which all points.
Welcome aboard
I firmly believe that "to be conscious" means to have a mind in a body.
I believe "to be conscious" needs a connection to the world outside oneself, needs the faculty of interoception, is inextricably integrated with sensation.
Are there degrees of consciousness? Sure, but it depends how we define the word. A baby is as conscious of itself as a being in their environment as an adult, maybe more so 
if you've ever experienced a baby in an uncomfortable full diaper.
Current and foreseeable AI are nowhere near this integration with the world. LLMs are never, ever, ever going to be "conscious." Will they become better at predictive modeling after they've ingested the entirety of the Internet, every text ever written by a human? Sure, but so what. When I was programming Eliza-like software in high school, I was impressed by how it seemed to be having a conversation. But all it did was follow instructions I had input. LLMs are merely a much more sophisticated model of this all over again.
I will grant there is a prediction component of consciousness (as in the theory of constructed emotions) but even that depends on input from the outside and internal stimulus and feedback.
I will also grant that there are degrees of consciousness. Is an amoeba conscious? Depends what we mean again. Is a dolphin conscious? I would say very likely. Is a chimpanzee? Definitely. The same as a human? No, they're a chimpanzee. They have a different connection to the world, but that is a matter of degree not kind I would offer.
AI software is not even an amoeba.
"Neither "ataraxia" nor "not ataraxia" but "Joy as the goal".
Singling out any one of the examples that Epicurus gives (ataraxia, aponia, khara, euphrosyne) as THE goal is problematic to different degrees.
Saying something like Pleasure is The Goal takes in the full spectrum of pleasure writ large.
Great thought-provoking posts, Matteng and wbernys . I'll address a couple points in a bit.
For me, there has to be something to the fact that aponia and aponos, in regular popular ancient usage, meant things like non-exertion, laziness; without toil or trouble,free from the necessity of labour. The adverb aponōs shows up in Herodotus as "without trouble":
subdue all Hellas without fighting. [2] As long as the Greeks who were previously in accord remained so, it would be difficult even for the whole world to overcome them by force of arms; “but if you do as we advise,” said the Thebans, “you will without trouble (aponōs) be master of all their battle plans. [3] Send money to the men who have power in their cities, and thereby you will divide Hellas against itself; after that, with your partisans to aid you, you will easily subdue those who are your adversaries.”
I know Epicurus redefined some words to fit his philosophy, but they were all still in the semantic range of the popular usage. So, while I'm not entirely onboard with wbernys 's point about aponia and ataraxia being synonymous, I do think Epicurus specifically uses them to illustrate katastematic pleasure for a reason, same as his choice of khara and euphrosyne as kinetic examples. The reason I'm reluctant to go the synonymous route is that Epicurus has to be pointing out the different kinds or aspects of katastematic pleasure, same for kinetic. It seems to me he's trying to say that there are multiple, numerous kinds of pleasure within the human experience. Broadly speaking, there is pleasure and there is pain. But within those TWO ways - and ONLY TWO ways - of experiencing the world, there are numerous variations.
That said, the nuance of aponia/aponos/aponōs of meaning free from work, exertion, toil, means to me an easy-going, effortless way of being. Surfing on the ocean, untroubled by any turbulent waves. I've seen ataraxia being connected with a calm sea. Maybe aponia could be (and I'm going off on my own here) is effortlessly surfing the waves when they do arise.
Maybe aponia, instead of freedom from pain, would be better thought of as freedom from toil, exertion, work, as in not fighting against one's existence. Effortlessly dealing with choices and rejections, letting the little things flow over you like "water off a duck's back" and "going with the flow." So, maybe serenity isn't a bad choice in the end.
I agree that modern commentators overplay katastematic/kinetic, Epicurus didn't say to pursue one aspect of pleasure only. However, those who would completely discount katastematic/kinetic as irrelevant, I disagree with as well. Just like the categories of desire, katastematic/kinetic has something to teach us about the multiplicity of pleasure.
What is the difference between mental aponia and ataraxia ?
Great question. It may be subtle, but there has to be a distinction. The closest I can come is that it's a matter of perspective. Ataraxia is focusing on the lack of disturbance, aponia is focusing on the ability to effortlessly deal with disturbance when it arises.
I'm still of the opinion that ataraxia has to do specifically with rooting the fundamental causes of fear and anxiety, ie, death, divine punishment, etc. I don't see one who has ataraxia as never ever being afraid of anything, never ever being anxious about some aspect of life. But the root causes of existential dread, fear, anxiety, once those are torn out - root and branch - they don't return and one has an unshakable foundation upon which to build one's life.
Something similar could be going on with aponia. How that works, I'm not exactly sure - Epicurus definitely uses it to refer to physical and mental pain, but I drop this here as a prompt for discussion.
You may find this article on Claude of interest.
Ditto
Is/Can Aponia be part of Eudaimonia ?
FWIW Here's an extensive thread on aponia's meaning:
I was personally blown away by this video. I'm sharing this without any commentary on the figure reciting the verse.
However, I also recommend watching it with the auto-generated captioning. It is hilarious!! (More wonders of AI )
I'm intrigued, but anything that starts out...
Possibly a protreptic vade mecum...
Is a bit daunting to say the least.
Yikes
Imagine being more impressed by psychics than physics.
I've seen numerous commercials for these charlatans on TV, and it makes me cringe and laugh every time.
When you connect with one of our psychics you are speaking – or chatting – with someone that has been tested and proven to possess the highest qualities in their field. ...
Over the years we’ve developed a rigorous system for choosing, evaluating, and cultivating psychic excellence so that each advisor brings unmatched accuracy, experience and skill to your readings.
....
Our gifted psychics undergo constant reevaluation. They need to maintain a high level of performance and consistent demonstration of psychic abilities to remain an advisor with California Psychics.
😂🤣😂 Egads. The TV commercials tout that their "psychics" have been "vetted." By Zeus, where's The Amazing Randi when you need him?!
Saw this in my morning scrolling and it seemed appropriate for here:
OH GODS! The "interview" is from PRAGER U?? Please don't bother engaging with Prager U propaganda!
And the "film" is one of those propaganda films that will end up getting shown in megachurches and fawned over by the faithful. The Story of Everything seems to be one of those "Case for Christ" "documentaries" it appears to me.
https://sypher.studio/ evidently also has a "film" entitled "After Death" as in "a captivating and thought-provoking documentary that delves into the enigmatic question that has fascinated humanity for centuries: What happens when we die? Through a combination of personal accounts, scientific research, philosophical discussions, and exploration of best-selling stories of near-death experiences, the film takes viewers on a profound journey of discovery. " Will you want to forcefully engage with that one, too?
The never-ending slop out there that could potentially be countered and engaged with is infinite!
From my perspective, putting out pro-Epicurean quality materials is better than trying to engage with this kind of propaganda.
Engaging in the public debate, unfortunately, nowadays, probably means engaging on social media: posting rebuttal links, etc. The BIG/HUGE/GINORMOUS problem with engaging in that forum is that the majority of commenters and social media posts are from chatbots or worse. One is arguing against a machine trying to get people to become engaged for clicks and eyeballs.
I was literally engaging with the "intelligent design" debate as far back as high school when I wrote a scathing (to my teenage mind) rebuttal to a pro-intelligent design speaker who came to our high school and spoke to an auditorium full of us impressionable youths. I don't think their arguments have gotten any better, only slicker.
I don't have a good answer to all this, but the Prager U tag on that interview video makes my head explode. They are dangerous and trying to inculcate young students and school in conservative areas are using THEIR materials to teach history, economics, science, etc. THAT'S where the real danger lies in my opinion:
...and not some film that will have a short shelf life other than for Christian congregations film night.
PS If this post is too political feel free to delete. You've evidently hit a nerve in me.
The article is a long one; however, it's a good solid one, too. The length has deterred me from making it all the way through... yet. It seems to be you're almost on your way to book chapters with these lengthy articles. I also wish you'd open comments, BUT I realize those can easily/quickly get out of hand and I would not expect you to retort or respond to all of them, positive or negative (Lookin' at you, Stoics).
That said...
I really want to understand how you use AI for these, because I refuse to believe you type in a prompt and out comes a fully-fledged article. I realize this might be hashing through some materials already covered on the blog, but your last section intrigues me:
This article is one of a series written to explain Epicurus’ views to modern audiences. It has been prepared with the use of AI assistance by Cassius Amicus, drawing on sources such as Epicurus’ surviving texts and works by T.H.M. Gellar-Goad, Victor Stenger, A.A. Long, and David Sedley, as listed in the References at the end of this document.
Do you input those texts and papers and "query" that as it's training model? Do you ask it specific queries section by section? Do you simply use it for grammar and syntax or to come up with "turns of phrase"?
In any case, thanks for putting these out into the world. Now, we have to get people to read them!
This gives you 40 seconds of the opening of the Letter to Menoeceus:
That one I actually bought. I need to get back to that at some point.
Just saw this recitation of the beginning of the Iliad on YouTube. Imagining this as an ancient rhapsode performing at a banquet is pretty easy. I found it intriguing.
