Posts by Kalosyni

Matteng this quote from the Hedonic Treadmill article is good:

Quote

one potential way to keep happiness from fading is to mix up the elements of one’s positive experiences so that they are less repetitive. Another approach is to try to appreciate such experiences even more by making an effort to pay attention to and savor what is enjoyable about them.

I personally feel like the concept of a "hedonic treadmill" is not helpful. Instead just think about how you want to move toward happiness (and enjoyment) and away from pain, and that it is a learning process that occurs through trial and error. Then, over time as you get older you become wiser and your happiness levels increase.

And this is: VS17. "It is not the young man who should be thought [most] happy, but the old man who has lived a good life. For the young man at the height of his powers is unstable, and is carried this way and that by fortune, like a headlong stream. But the old man has come to anchor in old age, as though in port, and the good things for which before he hardly hoped he has brought into safe harbor in his grateful recollections."

And from Letter to Menoeceus: "...Wherefore both when young and old a man must study philosophy, that as he grows old he may be young in blessings through the grateful recollection of what has been, and that in youth he may be old as well, since he will know no fear of what is to come. We must then meditate on the things that make our happiness, seeing that when that is with us we have all, but when it is absent we do all to win it."

The young man will learn much sooner what brings a life of happiness (through the study of philosophy).

I want add to the discussion of pain, the fact that opium was available in ancient Greece as a pain reliever.

Opium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here is an article that takes a different view from the one that I posted above, and which makes good points also:

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5276331/you-have-more-control-over-your-emotions-than-you-think

Welcome to the forum AUtC

You might like to check out these videos:

Quote from Kalosyni

De Rerum Natura, book 2, excerpt:

Will add soon [sunshine, birds-song in forests]

As I was listening to an audio recording of De Rerum Natura last week when sick in bed, this section cheered me up:

De Rerum Natura, Book 2, section 142 (Humphries translation):

When dawn bathes earth with morning light, and birds,

All kinds of them, flying through pathless woods,

Fill all the delicate air with liquid song,

How suddenly at such a time the sun

Clothes everything with light! This we can see,

And so can all men, plain before the eyes.

But the sun's warmth and that calm light come on

Not through an empty void; their course is set

More slowly, as if they parted waves of air

The way a swimmer does. Not one by one

Do the tiny particles of heat proceed,

But rather en masse,...

Regarding justice and "not to harm or be harmed"... once we understand what pain is (both mental and physical) and that we don't like pain or being harmed, and we can see that no one else wants to feel pain or be harmed, ......and if someone else is harmed, then it is natural to want to quickly stop the pain by taking actions to make it stop (or seeking retribution, now through civilized court system) as a natural human reaction...then...we realize that we don't want to cause turmoil or trouble for ourselves.... and in truely understanding what pain is then we also have empathy toward others.

Regarding lying and cheating - in the end this can tend to harm only oneself the most (rather than directly causing physical pain to others) - being found out and then relegated to only those friends who also lie and cheat, compounding one's problems.

Quote from DaveT

Furthermore when looking at the communal impact of an individual pursuing pleasure/good, "justice" in PD31 doesn't address the small things in life that impact us and others, sometimes in a big way. The agreed upon "crimes", PD 31 applies. Kill and you go to jail. But cheat, or lie in mostly undetectable ways, say on income tax returns, and Epicureanism seems to fail the reality test of bad communal consequences of those seeking the pleasure of more after tax income (justified because the rich get away with it all the time). If enough people do the small stuff that society can't touch or punish, you have everyone out for themselves in one way or another. Could it be that a weakness in Epicurus' teaching is that it can't apply to any community larger than the Garden?

First I want to point out that right now it seems that Western civilization is experiencing a "morality problem" (especially in the US). It can be seen in social media, news media, entertainment media, as well as by those in political power. It seems that some people are beginning to lose their sense of "human decency".

Our current society is not running on an "Epicurean philosophical worldview" but on the remnants of a "Platonic and Judeo-Christian worldview" - which either looks to heaven as the best place to go, and/or the belief that wealth/nice possession are the highest goal in life.

So the question of "What is the best life?" and "What actions bring a life of well-being and joy here on earth?" are not being addressed. And the Epicurean philosophy can't apply to a wider number of people (beyond a "garden"), since the "Platonic/Judeo-Christian" worldview (with it's now twisted and unmoral thinking) pervades so much of the thinking of people who are vocal and expressing their thoughts to everyone else.

Quote from DaveT

And Pleasure is easy to obtain, yes, but it's hard to measure.

Quote from DaveT

Quote from Don

I'm not sure what you mean by "hard to measure."

I was thinking it is hard to restrain yourself, the temptation is always "just a little bit more"

Here is what I found for myself:

1) Have gratitude for pleasure as it comes and pay attention to the experience as it unfolds.

2) Don't worry about whether or not future pleasures will come...because they will! But realize that they may not be in the exact same "package" (or object).

3) If you can't "get" or experience something (a specific thing) anymore, then you need to find substitutes.

4) If you feel like you are "always wanting more" (chocolate, sex, glass of wine...etc, etc.) then:

a) you need to start paying more attention to the experience and see when the switch between immediate enjoyment and satifaction (fulfilment and feeling like you had enough) occurs.

b) take something to excess and observe the process of pleasure switching to pain -- really observe and learn when the switch happens and then use that learning for making good choices in the future.

c) make sure you aren't "using" your pleasure as a distraction from mental pains (and if so implement a plan to deal with all that, maybe with self-help or a therapist).

Starting this thread for textual excerpts that express upbeat, optimistic, and/or joyful feelings...

Diogenes Laertius, book 10, excerpt:

"Also that in his letters he wrote to Leontion, "O Lord Apollo, my dear little Leontion, with what tumultuous applause we were inspired as we read your letter." Then again to Themista, the wife of Leonteus : "I am quite ready, if you do not come to see me, to spin thrice on my own axis and be propelled to any place that you, including Themista, agree upon" ; and to the beautiful Pythocles he writes : "I will sit down and await thy divine advent, my heart's desire."....It is observed too that in his treatise On the Ethical End he writes in these terms : "I know not how to conceive the good, apart from the pleasures of taste, sexual pleasures, the pleasures of sound and the pleasures of beautiful form."

De Rerum Natura, book 2, excerpt:

Will add soon [sunshine, birds-song in forests]

...More to be added soon

Feel free to post any other upbeat, optimistic, and joyful Epicurean text excerpts.

VS 16: "No one who sees what is bad chooses it willingly; instead he is lured into seeing it as good compared to what is even worse, and thus he is trapped."

Some thoughts on this...

Reasoning further on this to get a bigger picture on this: the calculation with regard to time is needed: short term outcomes, medium term outcomes, and long term outcomes. And also missing is not having properly reasoned through all possible outcomes and the likelihood of those outcomes coming to pass.

Also, this is true if one is willing to gamble that something unwanted won't happen as a consequence...but then over time not knowing if bad consequences will result is greatly disturbing/troubling and also tends to snowball into even more gambling with one's future.

A simple example: choosing to lie instead of telling the truth, and then forever having to lie to cover up the first lie...ends up being exhausting and then eventually either the truth is found out or the person forgets to keep lying to cover up their first lie...which results in further problems (others no longer trust that person)...etc.

Quote from DaveT

My take away from the selections is kind of like: Epicurus: What's good for me is good and what's bad for me is bad with proportions of each depending on prudence. And if everyone does it that way; "what a wonderful world it would be." (to borrow a phrase from a popular tune.)

While contrarily, Cicero is saying: Sure, I get that, sort of; but let's get real here. Everyone in the world can't be allowed to judge on their own, we'll have chaos. We need clear standards of right and wrong.

And then, I start to remember that when we do act for our own good, whether judged by pleasure, or by adhering to Virtues, there sometimes are unintended bad or evil consequences for others. And that leaves me wondering how to reconcile both Stoic and Epicurean real world consequences of individual as well as communal actions.

I've been thinking about how there are two differing meanings (or connotations) to consider with regard to the ideas (or words) "good" and "evil":

1) that which is either "good" or "bad" -- as in that which is either wanted or not wanted. In Epicureanism, this is determined by knowing what brings pleasure or pain.

2) that which is of a moral nature -- that which is either morally correct or morally wrong. This is determined by reason, based on the truth that all humans wish to not be harmed. I don't think we see this directly referenced within Epicurean philosophy, but if we reason through things then we arrive at very similar "morals" as all the highest held by society.

Principal Doctrine 5 demonstrates the final result of having reasoned through to the understanding that living prudently (and morally) leads to the best life: 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."

Also illustrated in: PD17: "The just man is most free from trouble; the unjust most full of trouble."

The benefit here is in understanding morals from a very grounded, visceral, and direct manner, rather than as something coming from God (or gods) which can be altered depending on "what God wants".

Yet there still remains the problem of conveying morals to very young children who are still unable to reason through things and understand cause and effect (end results and consequences. And of course there are plenty of adults who have trouble with this as well.

I'm going to need to sit out today's Zoom (still recovering from the flu).

I'm hoping that whatever good thoughts and ideas come up during the meeting can be posted here, if possible.

Quote from Cassius

The contention that good and evil are not absolute, and that sometimes the same thing can be bad and at other times good, is very important in contrasting how Epicurus thinks with the views of most other thinkers.

If you opened a jar of honey and ate a teaspoon of it it would be pleasurable, but if you were forced to eat the entire jar that would be painful -- all good and evil consists in sensation.

What Did Epicurus Say About the Relationship Between Good and Evil? - Epicureanfriends.com

www.epicureanfriends.com

Quote from Matteng

the Epicureans are the one who doesn´t accept Pain and try to avoid it.
Epicureans say Stoics doesn´t accept or want avoid (Painful/harmful) Emotions.

Epicureans seek pleasure, but at times they endure pain when it prevents a greater pain or leads to the pleasures that come with necessary things like food/shelter/health of the body and happiness of the soul -- This can be found in the Letter to Menoeceus.

I'm guessing that Stoics think that they need to be indifferent toward pleasures because they don't believe that there are certain pleasures which are easy to get, and also they don't trust that pleasure can lead to good results. And it seems that they may see pleasures as a distraction from being perfectly courageous (etc.) and a distraction from having the appearances in front of others of being virtuous. (Stoics want esteem in the eyes of others, but this won't necessarily lead to a happy life).

Emotions are a motivator for desiring, but if someone doesn't know how to prudently pursue pleasure, then they may think that they need to avoid feeling desire (and any emotions that lead to desire).

Here is a modern psychology article that is a must-read for anyone interested in the role of feelings and emotions in well-being:

The Key Skill We Rarely Learn: How to Feel Your Feelings

I feel my feelings! Probably not. But with courage and practice, we can cultivate the skill to deeply connect to ourselves and our values, opening up a world…

www.psychologytoday.com

I just verified with Cassius that the First Monday Meet and Greet Zoom for tonight is officially canceled. We hold the meeting on an as-needed basis for new members. We will set up another as soon as we have the need, so anyone with interest or questions regarding attendance please message Cassius or myself.

*****

(btw...I am feeling mostly better today, but not quite 100 percent yet).

Quote from Matteng

When I understood Philodemus right, I think the Epicurean view would only match with the Stoic view when the Emotion

1) has harmful consequences ( pleasure then is not choiceworthy for example )
2) is irrational, based on empty believe
3) is based on unnecessary desire

In short when the Emotions lead to more pain than pleasure.

Thank you Matteng for pointing this out.

Perhaps there is a way to fine-tune the differences, however, and especially because both feelings and emotions are important for making sense of the world, and so we need them as valid input for making good choices. Feelings and emotions have important input and shouldn't just be brushed aside in a "stoic" fashion. If something is actually "irrational" you would want to take the time to fully understand why, and that means you need to be able to tolerate the discomfort of seeing and understanding the big picture.

I just found this article: "ΓΕΝΕΣΙΑ. A Forgotten Festival of the Dead" - about Genesia:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/636925

On a less serious note...

Maybe we should proclaim October 31st as "Dress up like an ancient Greek or Roman" day!

From Wikipedia:

Quote

Care of the dead and the loving duty toward one's ancestors (pietas) were fundamental aspects of ancient Roman culture.^[52] A clear manifestation of this is Roman Republican era portrait busts which may have originated in the practice of making death masks of ancestors which were displayed in the home and during funerary rites and on the anniversary of the ancestor's death.

And further down:

Quote

Ancient Rome

edit

Detail from an early second-century Roman sarcophagus depicting the death of Meleager

See also: Roman funerals and burial

The Romans, like many Mediterranean societies, regarded the bodies of the dead as polluting.^[66] During Rome's Classical period, the body was most often cremated, and the ashes placed in a tomb outside the city walls. Much of the month of February was devoted to purifications, propitiation, and veneration of the dead, especially at the nine-day festival of the Parentalia during which a family honored its ancestors. The family visited the cemetery and shared cake and wine, both in the form of offerings to the dead and as a meal among themselves. The Parentalia drew to a close on February 21 with the more somber Feralia, a public festival of sacrifices and offerings to the Manes, the potentially malevolent spirits of the dead who required propitiation.^[67] One of the most common inscriptional phrases on Latin epitaphs is Dis Manibus, abbreviated D.M, "for the Manes gods", which appears even on some Christian tombstones. The Caristia on February 22 was a celebration of the family line as it continued into the present.^[68]

A noble Roman family displayed ancestral images (imagines) in the tablinum of their home (domus). Some sources indicate these portraits were busts, while others suggest that funeral masks were also displayed. The masks, probably modeled of wax from the face of the deceased, were part of the funeral procession when an elite Roman died. Professional mourners wore the masks and regalia of the dead person's ancestors as the body was carried from the home, through the streets, and to its final resting place.^[69]

You can read about various cultures and veneration of the dead at this wikipedia entry. (It doesn't say anything about ancient Greece).

Veneration of the dead - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My guess is that Epicurus would participated only because it was so widely practiced and seemed necessary to those who were not Epicureans.

Since we don't have an American annual ritual of ancestor veneration, then I think it would feel awkwar to try to start doing that, especially if as Epicureans we don't believe that a spirit survives death.