We are now requiring that new registrants confirm their request for an account by email. Once you complete the "Sign Up" process to set up your user name and password, please send an email to the New Accounts Administator to obtain new account approval.
I just came across another youtube on learning Greek (since every time I see Greek letters I have to mentally fill what I see with "sdfhsjdhfhsdhg" (not good, and wanting to be able to at least pronounce words).
Also, hoping...perhaps Don after you're done with your current ongoing project, you could put together some kind of summary of all your helpful tips and links, into our wiki.
You know when I combine in my mind the assertions that motion is an illusion, that time is an illusion, that everything our senses show us is nothing more than the illusions caused by shadows flickering on the wall of Plato's cave, it's hard to shake the feeling that this is the real heart of Epicurean philosophy.
For myself, I thinking about time as being "by convention" rather than and illusion...
Definitions (from internet):
An illusion is a distortion of the senses, which can reveal how the mind normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. Although illusions distort the human perception of reality, they are generally shared by most people
Conventionalism is the philosophical attitude that fundamental principles of a certain kind are grounded on (explicit or implicit) agreements in society, rather than on external reality.
From post 3 quote above (and from Joshua's first link):
The idealist view is that time is a property of the human mind and therefore is an illusion. The passage of time is depends on human observers.
In last night's Zoom, I recall something from the material that said: "time is by necessity" ? ...Did I remember correctly and was it by Philodemus?
Imagine that we lived on a planet that rotated the sun, but did not itself rotate (but always stayed with the same side facing the sun) and did not have a moon. Life would evolve without circadian rhythms, and would that lead to a lack of the conception of time in evolved/sentient life forms?
Wishing everyone here Happy Holidays! 
Here is a picture of my Epicurus altar that I set up this morning:
If anyone else wants to share pictures of their Epicurus bust Epicurus pictures, or Epicurus altar, feel free to post here
Happy Twentieth Everyone!
jason Welcome to the forum!
The act of finding them establishes interference, therefore whatever you have just found is definitely not Epicurean gods. Looking for such gods makes as much sense as trying to see an invisible elephant. If you see it, it's definitely not an invisible elephant.
There is nothing in Epicurean texts that says the gods are invisible.
Seeing "films" is not bodily contact (not interference).
Letter to Menoeceus says: "For gods there are, since the knowledge of them is by clear vision."
This is just what the texts say. I think it is up to each person to decide if they "like" (or agree with) this or not. I personally consider myself an atheist, so this idea doesn't resonate for me personally (just for the record).
PD1: "That which is blissful and immortal has no troubles itself, nor does it cause trouble for others, so that it is not affected by anger or gratitude (for all such things come about through weakness)."
---> This seems to indicate that which is not a god. And would be saying that what everyone thinks are the gods, are not gods.
This year is the 50th Aniversary of the Getty Villa. We've likely already had posts about this in other threads, but here is the news about this:
m.repetzki and `all new members, and visitors...just a heads up on some recommended reading and on what to focus on...for what is best for studying the philosophy of Epicurus:
-- we recommend DeWitt's book and Austin's book, and also studying the extant texts: Diogenes Laertius' Book 10 (especially the three letters written by Epicurus, and the Principal Doctrines. Also, the Vatican Sayings, Cicero's Toquatus section, and the Wall of Oionanda -- you can read about these here.
Welcome to the forum m.repetzki !
Here is an interesting article:
I may be alone in this, but I continue to think that desire is a kind of pain. We feel it as pain because we feel it as dissatisfaction, and dissatisfaction is a kind of pain.
Every individual perceives things subjectively according to the given circumstances. And it seem that there are differing levels of intensity of desire (from just a low-level niggling feeling of dissatisfaction up to high-level stress, anger or hopelessness.)
There are some desires that when we know they will will soon be fulfilled, it is a pleasurable experience of anticipation. For example: feeling mildly hungry and arriving for Christmas, smelling the turkey just out of the oven, and the announcement for everyone to come sit down at the dining table.
When we desire something and believe we need it, but yet we don't know how to get it, that it when desire feels painful. (For example: feeling extremely hungry, arriving for Christmas, being told the the turkey just went into the oven, and noticing that there are no hors d'oeuvres).
I think as time goes on (and depending on circumstances) the sense of pain can shift to feel less painful, because we can learn to problem solve situations. (For example: remembering to always pack a small amount of food (nuts or protein bar) with you if you tend to have hypoglycemia episodes).
Hi All, and this is especially to new members and readers...you can check out our Featured Threads here:
We'll keep this post "pinned" at the top of the list so people can easily find the link.
I've been thinking about how to express a response to incorrect statements that Epicureans were people who minimized their desires. Also behind this is the idea that having desires cause pain, and thus leads to the erroneous idea to try to remove desire rather than doing what needs to be done to achieve the goals of desire. But the goals of desire are pleasure and removal of pain. We've talked about this already in many other places on the forum in other threads, but...well why not again. 
Since I am starting with theory (and quotes from the Principal Doctrines) to point to why this idea is incorrect, I decided to post in this forum rather than the Practical Applications Forum. But ultimately this needs to be applied in one's life, so I hope to write about practical applications as well (in later additional posts).
In the Principal Doctrines we see:
PD22: 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. (Saint Andre translation)
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. (Saint Andre translation)
In the Torquatus narrative (section 30) we read:
"Every creature, as soon as it is born, seeks after pleasure and delights therein as in its supreme good, while it recoils from pain as its supreme evil, and banishes that, so far as it can, from its own presence, and this it does while still uncorrupted, and while nature herself prompts unbiased and unaffected decisions. So he says we need no reasoning or debate to shew why pleasure is matter for desire, pain for aversion. These facts he thinks are simply perceived, just as the fact that fire is hot, snow is white, and honey sweet..." (Reid translation)
Seeing that we are naturally drawn to pleasure just as we are naturally drawn to the sweetness of honey, let us now consider this question: What should we do when we want something but it is difficult or impossible to get?
PD26 says this: "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."
1) If a desire for something is easy to fulfill then it there is no problem with it unless it produces harm as a consequence. (see PD8)
2) The desires that bring pain when unfulfilled are the ones that are necessary (necessary desires) and so these are the ones to put time and effort into fulfilling. By pain = physical pain AND those things which when unfulfilled lead to depletion of strength/health of the body and the mind. (see Letter to Menoeceus).
PD30 says this: "Among natural desires, those that do not bring pain when unfulfilled and that require intense exertion arise from groundless opinion; and such desires fail to be stamped out not by nature but because of the groundless opinions of humankind."
It is common sense that all animals (including humans) need to eat to live, and naturally become hungry (with a feeling of discomfort). This occurs daily and we easily know what to do when we are hungry - we eat!
It is important to think about what other "creature comforts" we are born to desire? These are the desires that occur over and over again, and when they are adequately fulfilled on an ongoing basis they lead to good health and happiness, plus the experience of pleasure arises when these desires are fulfilled. Unfortunately we don't have a specific list from the extant texts of Epicurus, but we do see that friendship (PD27) and self-sufficiency (achieving security of adequate skills/resources) are ones that are highlighted.
I hope this shows that Epicureans are actually embracing many desires by fulfilling desires, and that we need not fear the feeling of desire, but instead turn towards the ones that nature gives us with joy.
There is probably a lot more to add here, so I welcome further thoughts.
Welcome to the forum GnothiSeauton !
Here are some things you might want to check out if you haven't already:
...and two YouTube videos by Cassius:
Welcome to the forum Lua050904 !
Here are some things you might want to check out if you haven't already:
...and two YouTube videos by Cassius:
Cassius posted this over in another thread:
I wish we had some shorthand way of indicating a reasonable level of confidence for a particular passage of text. Maybe we ought to create a thread to explore some kind of ranking system that would include factors like:
....
Once again trying to do some filing of threads posted in General Discussion. If you were the originator of a thread and believe that it should have been filed in a different location, please let me know by private message.
Also, if you can't find a thread that was previously in the General Discussion, you might try Google search and type in:
-EpicureanFriends.com and the topic or title-
...(which sometimes works better than the forum search function).
