Happy Birthday! mlinssen
Posts by Kalosyni
-
-
Happy Birthday! kochiekoch
-
I found this website which lists various cognitive biases:
QuoteDid you know that much of what we decide every day is not a “decision,” but an unconscious reaction—made when our mind makes a quick assumption on our behalf? These little shortcuts save us from deliberating about each piece of information flowing through our minds in every second of the day.
These shortcuts allow mental efficiency by letting small decisions occur quickly and often unnoticed. But, when a shortcut is flawed because of a cognitive bias, it can sometimes distort reality and impact our decision-making. ...
...The term cognitive bias was first developed in the 1970s by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, who after years of research found that people often had flawed patterns of thinking and reacting when faced with decisions. Kahneman, following Tversky’s death, went on to write the now globally acclaimed: Thinking, Fast and Slow, which details how cognitive biases impact decision-making. ...
...Researchers and scientists continue to document the number of cognitive biases that can trip up our decision-making. Some scientists have the number as high as 188. Below, we highlight a few of the most common.
It is important to learn how to identify these biases, and then watch out for them so that they do not negatively impact our decision-making. Keep in mind that you, or others, can be influenced by more than one cognitive bias at a time.
Read more:
https://alliancefordecisioneducation.org/what-is-decision-education/cognitive-biases/
(scroll both up and down on that website to read the various biases)
-
In the end Epicurus is defining pleasure so broadly that in the end it's not really logically consistent to say "friendship and pleasure" given that. Friendship or anything else is either pleasurable (or leading to more pleasure than pain, even if some pain is required to obtain it) or there is no reason to pursue it.
I think that is why it works better to say that there are multiple "goods" for an Epicurean -- friendship is a great good, but not the "highest good". And "virtue" is a good, when it leads to a pleasant life. As for "pleasures", you could choose to pursue a pleasure that results in 55 percent pleasure and 45 percent pain - but that wouldn't be the "highest good" -- the highest good is a good which is as good as it can get (PD03).
The point I think needs to be made is that you can't just say that your whole goal is to avoid pain. If so, then you can just kill yourself. Your goal is to live pleasurably, which requires that you live, being alive being a good/pleasurable thing unless you are in a situation where you are guaranteed more pain than pleasure). Treasuring life in such a way is a positive activity.
There is a difference in mental cognition between "avoiding pain" -vs- "choosing pleasures which do not lead to pain" because there are a lot of pleasures which do not lead to any pain. Also, there are prudent ways to engage with objects of pleasure that do not result in pain (for example eating the right amount rather than too much).
and if you just say "My highest goal is to avoid pain" in 2026 English, then the majority of people are rightly going to say that the only way to guarantee success in that is to kill yourself.
Probably better to say "my highest goal is to seek pleasures which have good and pleasant results rather than painful consequences". I think that confining this to the types of pleasures, rather than all necessary actions undertaken in life (such as getting into a car and driving to work which has always a small risk of being in a car accident), works much better for cognition of choices. But of course you do need to consider what is safe to do, such as avoiding driving in a blizzard. And all of this boils down to "well-being".
-
In our case the guidance of nature is to pursue pleasure and avoid pain, so whatever choices in reality and in total effect achieve that goal should be considered virtuous.
I'm getting hung up on the word "virtue" and it's meaning.
Cassius it seems like instead of this sentence ending in "virtuous" it could end in the word "good" or "beneficial".
I haven't studied enough to know what all of the various ancient Greek philosophers said, but here are some Wikipedia entries on modern understanding of virtue(s).
Here is Wikipedia on virtue:
QuoteA virtue (Latin: virtus) is a trait of excellence, including traits that may be moral, social, or intellectual. The cultivation and refinement of virtue is held to be the "good of humanity" and thus is valued as an end purpose of life or a foundational principle of being. In human practical ethics, a virtue is a disposition to choose actions that succeed in showing high moral standards: doing what is said to be right and avoiding what is wrong in a given field of endeavour, even when doing so may be unnecessary from a utilitarian perspective. When someone takes pleasure in doing what is right, even when it is difficult or initially unpleasant, they can establish virtue as a habit. Such a person is said to be virtuous through having cultivated such a disposition. The opposite of virtue is vice.
-
For anyone who is interested in reading the Philodemus text, check out these two posts:
and here:
-
analysis on virtue as inseparable goods of life
wbernys Thanks for sharing this here, and this is an interesting project that perhaps all Epicureans should take on -- a project in which we each define the virtues in our own words, and as Epicurean philosophy directs, as the means to which a pleasant life comes to be. And, I would guess that each person will have wording that differs as they describe the virtues -- the virtues are abstract ideas that need to be tied down to concrete experiences, so also in some sense they are "alive" and function in connection with life situations.
Ultimately they can be summed up as "do no harm" both to others and to oneself. Non-harming brings about a good life free from troubles.
-
unfortunately they all seem really expensive and unsure quality
Here is alternative to rings & necklaces:
One inexpensive thing to do is to find an image of Epicurus online, and then print it out and frame it. Most libraries have printers if you don't have one yourself. The frame won't cost too much if you make it small 5"x7" or 8"x10". This would be one way to create something to place on a small "home altar".
And another aspect to add to a home altar would be to add a few books on Epicurean philosophy - and an inexpensive alternative to books would be to print out the Principal Doctrines, etc. (again this could be done at a library). and bind them into an inexpensive school report folder. Also, there is the option of hand-writing the Doctrines or the Letter to Menoeceus and displaying it on the altar.
-
PD21. "He who has learned the limits of life knows that that which removes the pain due to want, and makes the whole of life complete, is easy to obtain, so that there is no need of actions which involve competition."
I was curious what was meant by the word "competition" and so I did a search and found...
...this article:
Agonistic Orientation and Cultural Dynamics in Ancient Greece
QuoteThis essay centers on the cultural experience that the Greeks had to face again and again in ever-new circumstances: agonistic orientation. Ancient Greek culture was highly competitive. There was hardly an area of life that wasn’t shaped by competitive thinking. On the one hand, the ethos of competition united all of Greece and separated it from other cultures. On the other hand, this ethos also divided them as individuals from each other within their own culture, being under the persistent pressure to distinguish themselves. The Greek word “agon” covers all the dimensions of competition: it refers to the warlike conflict of life and death as well as political rivalries. It also denotes the competition between professions and ways of life as well as the competition between athletes and artists.
Knowing the role of competition within ancient Greek society (among male citizens) really sheds some light on understanding PD21.
Since in modern times non-stop competition only exists with certain professions (such as stockbrokers in the stock market, etc, etc.) and competitive sports (such as football, etc.) and is only taken on by the few who engage in those activites, and so most people do not face the mental stresses and agitation that that kind of competition can bring on.
-
I need the link ...I can't find previous one
EdGenX Zoom links are always located in private conversations.
-
Here is this same section, translated by Johnston:
Quote"I am not unaware how difficult it is to clarify in Latin verse obscure matters discovered by the Greeks, above all since we must deal with many things employing new words, because our language is impoverished and the subject new. But your own excellence and the pleasure I look forward to from your sweet friendship are prompting me to finish any work, no matter how demanding, urging me to stay awake throughout the peaceful night, seeking words and verse where I can at last hold up a clear light for your mind, and you can see into the hidden core of things.
And so this terror, this darkness of mind, must be dispelled, not by rays from the sun or bright shafts of daylight, but by reason and the face of nature. And we will start to weave her first principle as follows: nothing is ever brought forth by the gods from nothing.1 That is, of course, how, through fear, all mortal men are held in check—they view many things done on earth and in the sky, effects whose causes they cannot see at all, and so they assume that such things happen because of gods. Hence, once we understand that nothing can be produced from nothing, 210 then we shall more accurately follow what we are looking for, how everything can be created and all work can be done without any assistance from the gods."
https://johnstoniatexts.x10host.com/lucretius/lucretiusall.pdf
-
and there are still aspects of Platonism/Aristotelian thinking in the modern world
Perfectionism and black-and-white thinking (and other problems).
-
You both do a wonderful job of clarifying the distinctions between the schools, full stop! Your work on the podcasts with Joshua illuminates so much for me and most likely many others. There’s so much there to learn about.
It bothers me somewhat to hear criticism of the other schools with a broad brush in response to their attacks on Epicurean thought. It might sound odd coming from a retired lawyer, but resolving one dispute needn’t solely focus on the misstatements and accusations of the opponents. That leads to arguments that never end (except in courtrooms where judgements can be final!)
I think that comparing and contrasting between ancient schools provides a lens for learning about Epicurean philosophy and there are still aspects of Platonism/Aristotelian thinking in the modern world -- and by thinking through things at the abstract level we can avoid delving into current events or current politics.
-
Wisdom (prudence), Courage, Temperance, and Justice.
I don't think that even in the US there is just one absolute definition of what these are. And these labels are only understood in contrast to their opposites, as well as requiring an examination of specific actions and specific situations. For an "absolute" understanding we would have to be able to consistently describe what perfect prudence would look like, and what would perfect courage look like...etc.
PD05 - "It is not possible to live pleasantly without living prudently, honorably, and justly, [nor again to live a life of prudence, honor, and justice] without living pleasantly. And the man who does not possess the pleasant life is not living prudently, honorably, and justly, [and the man who does not possess the virtuous life] cannot possibly live pleasantly."
And PD17 - "The just man is most free from trouble; the unjust most full of trouble."
-
So, back to the thrust of my question above: Why should anyone dwell on whether Lucretius interpreted Epicurus wrongly or indeed intentionally declined to include Epicurus’ atomism?
Perhaps because it is a body of writing that has transcended time, and that has given it a bit of a "special quality" that is different than just some "Joe-shmo". There is also the presentation of many ideas which are the basis for cognizing the material world, free from religion and superstition - and we still live in a world where a great many people are bound up by superstitions so this is still important for our time. Also, because much of what Epicurus wrote was lost but Lucretius has preserved his ideas.
Even if the science has now advanced on many things, what else is there that does what Lucretius does? Perhaps it is time for modern people to do what he did in a more up-to-date manner, while also still preserving the many subtle truths on things like the nature of the soul and death.
-
From Torquatus:
"More, any pains that the Wise Man may encounter are never so severe but that he has more cause for gladness than for sorrow. Again, it is a fine saying of Epicurus that 'the Wise Man is but little interfered with by fortune: the great concerns of life, the things that matter, are controlled by his own wisdom and reason'; and that 'no greater pleasure could be derived from a life of infinite duration than is actually afforded by this existence which we know to be finite.'"
-
The following on similarities and differences, from Google AI:
Quote- Similarities: Both systems argue that things do not come from nothing; they are formed by causes and conditions. Both philosophies are materialistic/phenomenological (denying a divine creator) and emphasize the impermanent nature of compound objects.
- Differences: Lucretius is strictly materialistic atomist—everything is physical particles in a void. Buddhist Dependent Origination is psychophysical—it includes mental states (consciousness, feeling, craving) as necessary conditions for existence. Lucretius focuses on liberating the mind from fear of death, while Buddhism focuses on stopping the cycle of rebirth and suffering through enlightenment.
-
one understands that god/gods are not creating all the phenomenon of the world but that they come from naturally occurring processes.
Unrelated to the subject of this thread (with my apologies), I like the way that you worded this Kalosyni . The wording that you've used here can include both the physical processes by which gods (godlike beings?) exist, as illustrated by the realist position, as well as the natural processes of both people grappling with the unknown and of cultural accretion as perhaps in the idealist position.
I see now that the referred to object of the pronoun "they" that I used was unclear, and I had intended it to be read this way:
The investigation of nature is important so that one understands that god/gods are not creating all the phenomenon of the world, but that the phenonenon of the world are caused by naturally occurring processes unrelated in any way to god/gods.
-
There are quite a few passages in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura (more than just these) which describe dependent origination, but here is one section, Bailey translation:
1-803
‘But,’ you say, ‘the facts show clearly that all things are nourished and grow from the earth up into the breezes of the sky; and unless the season at a propitious time fosters them with rain, so that the trees rock beneath the outpouring of the storm-clouds, and the sun for its part cherishes them, and bestows its heat on them, crops, trees, living creatures, none could grow.’ Yes, in very truth, unless we too were nurtured by dry food and soft moisture, we should lose our flesh, and all the life too would be loosened from all our sinews and bones. For beyond all doubt we are nurtured and nourished upon things determined, and other things again, each in their turn, on things determined. Yea, we may be sure, it is because many first-beginnings common in many ways to many things are mingled among things, that so diverse things are nourished on diverse food. And often it is of great matter with what others those first-beginnings are bound up, and in what position, and what movements they mutually give and receive; for the same build up sky, sea, earth, rivers, sun, the same too crops, trees, living creatures, but only when mingled with different things and moving in different ways.
1-823
Indeed scattered abroad in my verses you see many letters common to many words, and yet you must needs grant that verses and words are unlike both in sense and in the ring of their sound. So great is the power of letters by a mere change of order. But the first-beginnings of things can bring more means to bear, by which all diverse things may be created.
-
The topic of whether or not we can accurately perceive reality is very important, especially if some people may be more prone to errors of perception. And it does seem that modern neuroscience has made great advancements in understanding compared to the time of Epicurus. We've likely already talked about this in other threads, but I think it is a worthwhile topic to continue.
Here is a good article I found:
The Neuroscience of RealityReality is constructed by the brain, and no two brains are exactly alikewww.scientificamerican.comQuoteThe central idea of predictive perception is that the brain is attempting to figure out what is out there in the world (or in here, in the body) by continually making and updating best guesses about the causes of its sensory inputs. It forms these best guesses by combining prior expectations or “beliefs” about the world, together with incoming sensory data, in a way that takes into account how reliable the sensory signals are. Scientists usually conceive of this process as a form of Bayesian inference, a framework that specifies how to update beliefs or best guesses with new data when both are laden with uncertainty.
In theories of predictive perception, the brain approximates this kind of Bayesian inference by continually generating predictions about sensory signals and comparing these predictions with the sensory signals that arrive at the eyes and the ears (and the nose and the fingertips and all the other sensory surfaces on the outside and inside of the body). The differences between predicted and actual sensory signals give rise to so-called prediction errors, which are used by the brain to update its predictions, readying it for the next round of sensory inputs. By striving to minimize sensory-prediction errors everywhere and all the time, the brain implements approximate Bayesian inference, and the resulting Bayesian best guess is what we perceive.
QuoteTo understand how dramatically this perspective shifts our intuitions about the neurological basis of perception, it is helpful to think in terms of bottom-up and top-down directions of signal flow in the brain. If we assume that perception is a direct window onto an external reality, then it is natural to think that the content of perception is carried by bottom-up signals—those that flow from the sensory surfaces inward. Top-down signals might contextualize or finesse what is perceived, but nothing more. Call this the “how things seem” view because it seems as if the world is revealing itself to us directly through our senses.
The prediction machine scenario is very different. Here the heavy lifting of perception is performed by the top-down signals that convey perceptual predictions, with the bottom-up sensory flow serving only to calibrate these predictions, keeping them yoked, in some appropriate way, to their causes in the world. In this view, our perceptions come from the inside out just as much as, if not more than, from the outside in. Rather than being a passive registration of an external objective reality, perception emerges as a process of active construction—a controlled hallucination, as it has come to be known.
Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com
Here is a list of suggested search strategies:
- Website Overview page - clickable links arrranged by cards.
- Forum Main Page - list of forums and subforums arranged by topic. Threads are posted according to relevant topics. The "Uncategorized subforum" contains threads which do not fall into any existing topic (also contains older "unfiled" threads which will soon be moved).
- Search Tool - icon is located on the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere."
- Search By Key Tags - curated to show frequently-searched topics.
- Full Tag List - an alphabetical list of all tags.