Posts by Don

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"?

Quote from Cassius

I don't see how that is compatible with implying that everything everyone does is "necessarily' because they see it as leading to greater pleasure for them.

I don't think people need to consciously see all their actions as "leading to greater pleasure for them." It's a fact, as far as I'm concerned. Pleasure is the telos, summum bonum, the end to which all actions and decisions ultimately end. This PD is asking us to acknowledge that fact. It's not like we need to subject every miniscule decision to a hedonic calculus. We can lie to ourselves and try to convince ourselves that "I'm doing this to be virtuous / wise / altruistic / etc." but we're always always trying to lead our lives to greater pleasure for ourselves and away from pain. We can have ideas that lead is astray that try to convince ourselves we're leading our life to greater pleasure, but it's still a lie.

I'm also seeing other translations use reasoning and rationalization even creed:.“If at any time you fail to refer each of your acts to nature's standard, and turn off instead in some other direction when making a choice to avoid or pursue, your actions will not be consistent with your creed.” Strodach (2012)

That seems more in line with my interpretation.

PD25 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.

εἰ μὴ παρὰ πάντα καιρὸν ἐπανοίσεις ἕκαστον τῶν πραττομένων ἐπὶ τὸ τέλος τῆς φύσεως, ἀλλὰ προκαταστρέψεις εἴτε φυγὴν εἴτε δίωξιν ποιούμενος εἰς ἄλλο τι, οὐκ ἔσονταί σοι τοῖς λόγοις αἱ πράξεις ἀκόλουθοι.

PD25 literally uses εἴτε φυγὴν εἴτε δίωξιν which are the antonyms of each other mentioned above: flee/escape from and pursue/chase. Saint-Andre chooses to use the traditional "avoid" but that doesn't translate the dichotomy of φυγὴν and δίωξιν.

Quote from DaveT

Quote from Don

https://www.alieward.com/ologies/dolorology

this ologies episode on pain was interesting, especially about its bio-psycho-social aspects of pain. Worth a listen.

Thanks. I read the transcript. Just curious, as a "grey hair" how did you come across this podcast?

LOL I've been subscribed to ologies for years. I don't listen to all episodes, but I'll regularly scan through the titles.

Quote from Titus

Quote from Don

I want to note that where Martin Ferguson Smith gives "states" in the translation, the Greek is κατασ̣τήμασι and καταστημάτων, that is katastēmasi and katastēmatōn.

Do you have a recommendation how to translate this section smoothly where Ferguson instead gives "states"? (Let us first discuss states...)

"States" isn't a bad choice as it tries to convey a stable condition rather than something in flux, something moving. I will say I don't like "static" as that to me conveys ossification and rigidity. In the past, I've written "It comes from καθιστημι according to LSJ with connotations like restore, return, set in order, etc. So it's not a static state, it's a return to order (ataraxia and aponia) after the 'excitement' of euphrosyne and khara."

But you asked for a translation of the section. To be specific, κατασ̣τήμασι is a plural dative and τῶν καταστημάτων is the plural genitive of κατάστημα "state, condition; which is related to καθίστημι. Check out that link for the numerous connotations of that word, including bring down to a place; replace, restore; set in order, array, of soldiers; bring into a certain state; etc. This is why translation is so tricky. Words have semantic contexts to a speaker of that language that can be completely missed by simple substitutions from language A to B.

But that's never stopped me before , so here's my crack at the first sentence of the Greek (Oh my! I am rusty!)...

ἡμ[εῖς δὲ ζη]τ̣ῶ̣μεν ἤ̣δ̣η πῶς ὁ βίος ἡμεῖν ἡδὺς γένηται καὶ ἐν τοῖς κατασ̣τήμασι καὶ ἐν ταῖς πράξεσιν.

So, let us now consider what stable conditions and what actions produce the sweet, pleasant life for us.

Yes, Titus . Agreed.

For the record, here's the Greek for that section emphasis added):

Quote

ἡμ[εῖς δὲ ζη]τ̣ῶ̣μεν ἤ̣δ̣η πῶς ὁ βίος ἡμεῖν ἡδὺς γένηται καὶ ἐν τοῖς κατασ̣τήμασι καὶ ἐν ταῖς πράξεσιν. περὶ δὲ τῶν καταστημάτων πρῶτον εἴπωμεν, ἐκεῖνο τηροῦντες, τὸ δὴ ὅτι τῶν ὀχλούντων τὴν ψυχὴν παθῶν ὑπεξαιρεθέντων τὰ ἥδοντα αὐτὴν ἀντιπαρέρχεται. ⁦ vac. 1⁩ τὰ οὖν ὀχλοῦντα τίνα [ἐστ]ί̣ν; ⁦ vac. 1⁩ φόβοι μέν̣ [εἰσιν] [ὁ] μ̣ὲν ἐκ θεῶν, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ ὁ [δ' ἀπὸ] [θ]α̣νάτου, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ ὁ δ' ἀπ' [ἀλγη-]...

I want to note that where Martin Ferguson Smith gives "states" in the translation, the Greek is κατασ̣τήμασι and καταστημάτων, that is katastēmasi and katastēmatōn. Diogenes is talking about the good old katastematic and kinetic pleasures here. He doesn't use kinetic but instead πράξεσιν praxesin from πρᾶξῐς (prâxĭs): "act; action; activity; deed; doing" The word used by Epicurus κίνησις kinēsis is motion, opposed to "rest" (στάσις). I would say opposed to "states."

This goes along with my contention that the katastematic pleasure of ataraxia and maybe aponia is achieved by rooting out these "fears —of the gods, of death, and of [pains]— and, besides [these], desires that [outrun] the limits fixed by nature." These are what gives humans dread and anxiety about the big picture of their life. Will they still have some anxiety about everyday things? Sure, I think so, but ripping out those fundamental existential disturbing fears provides a solid foundation upon which to build one's life.

I'm curious to compare the arrangement of the text in the book to this:

DCLP/Trismegistos 865216 = LDAB 865216

Quote from Cassius

Up to now the version at the link below has been the best available to us:

That's what I like about this March 2026 publication. It's legit from MFS himself along with his notes and intro.

The whole Untroubled Substack feed looks worthwhile to explore. I'm not sure who the author is, but he praises Emily Austin's book so

Book Review: Emily Austin’s Living For Pleasure

If you read one book on Epicurean ethics, make it this one

open.substack.com

FYI

"Fragments of Diogenes' work were discovered in 1884-1889. Further investigations were inaugurated by Martin Ferguson Smith in 1968-1973 and continued during British and German-led surveys (1974-2017). The number of known pieces of the inscription more than tripled, from 88 in the 19th century to 305. This translation, the first in English to include all the latest discoveries and research, is intended for all who are interested in philosophy, in the intellectual and cultural history of the Greek world under the Roman Empire, and in the story of an impressive and moving human document."

I look forward to digging into the text, but I really like the playlist/section titles! Well played!

https://www.tabedizioni.it/web/content/462840

FREE DOWNLOAD from Martin Ferguson Smith

Epicurean Ethics: The Primary Sources

What to Read and Recommended Translations

open.substack.com

I came across this Substack article and it looked generally like a good list of sources, including...

Urbi et Orbi

www.tabedizioni.it

"Just this year (March 2026), however, the leading scholar on Diogenes, Martin Ferguson Smith, released the most up to date English translation of the whole text, available free online under the title Urbi et Orbi: The Epicurean Inscription and Prescription of Diogenes of Oinoanda." 🎉

This should become our definitive version of the Oinoanda inscription translation. Apologies if this has already been noted. This is a Big Deal! The downloaded PDF looks great!