Posts by Kalosyni

Quote from UnPaid_Landlord

I have a question Kalosyni I have heard somewhere that Epicurus favoured the pleasures of the mind over the pleasures of body, is that true ?

In some sense you could say that is true: if your mind is full of anxiety then you cannot fully experience and savor the pleasures of the body.

But there is the quote by Diogenes Laertius Book 10, states that Epicurus says: [Section 06] ‘I know not how I can conceive the good, if I withdraw the pleasures of taste and withdraw the pleasures of love and those of hearing and sight.’

UnPaid_Landlord wecome to the forum!

Just a heads up, that we do have a monthly meet-and-greet via Zoom which happens every first Monday of each month. This meeting is open to Introductory Members and provides an opportunity to meet others who are studying the philosophy of Epicurus. We also have a special Epicurean topic of discussion every month, which provides an opportunity to engage in live Zoom-time philosophizing!

Here is the link to find out more (next meeting will happen on August 5th):

Post

First Monday Epicurean Philosophy Hour (Overview) - 2024

General Overview:

Join us on the first Monday of every month for our forum-wide meet-and-greet and Epicurean philosophy discussion, for registered members of EpicureanFriends.com. Each month we present a special discussion topic, and these will be announced in the dedicated thread for each specific meeting.

For new members who have not attended any previous Zoom meetings: please be sure that you have posted in your personal Welcome Thread, with an introduction of yourself and any background…

Kalosyni

December 26, 2023 at 2:48 PM

*************************************************

**Posts addressing Absurdism have been copied/moved.

**Please post all responses to continued discussion on Absurdism over in this new thread:

Post

The Absurdity of Absurdism (?)

Welcome! @UnPaid_Landlord

[…]

Ha! You're not the only one. Now there are at least three of us here thinking about Absurdism. I don't know exactly what's the link, but I always found Absurdism interesting. Maybe Epicureanism and Absurdism are like moths and fire or peanut better and jelly or something... probably not.

Anyway, if someone wants 10 mins introduction to Absurdism in humorous yet surprisingly insightful way, follow the link. (warning: Parental Advisory Explicit Content)

…

TauPhi

July 4, 2024 at 9:03 PM

Quote from UnPaid_Landlord

What is the Goal of Epicureanism?

It's Aponia and Atraxia, basically a body free of pain and a mind free of trouble,

The highest pleasure itself is Aponia and Atraxia, the limit of pleasure is reached when we attain it.

Here is my take regarding the Epicurean goal:

There are all these pleasures:

• There are pleasures of the body - sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, movement, rest, etc. - and these last for a certain alotment of time (some of these pleasures are very short lived).
• There are pleasures of the mind - joy which arises from friendship, suffienciency, wisdom, learning, gratitude, and remembering pleasurable experiences of the past, etc., ...as well as the cultivated awareness of when body and mind are free from pain - and these pleasures also last for a certain alotment of time (these can have a longer duration (for example it is stated that friendship is an "immortal good").

We do see that eudaimonia is mentioned in the Letter to Menoeceus:

"Reflect on what brings happiness, because if you have that you have everything, but if not you will do everything to attain it."

Eudaimonia is also roughly translated as well-being. So for myself, I see eudaimonia as being the goal (and eudaimonia also includes pleasures).

Being that pleasure is a natural uprising of life, then we accept all pleasures which lead to a life well lived - a full life lived with joy and well-being, and a healthy mind in a healthy body.

Also, if you look at PD 4 again (in post 4), you'll see that there is the word "delight", so to me this points to the idea that pleasure is to actively be sought out.

"Pain does not last continuously in the flesh; instead, the sharpest pain lasts the shortest time, a pain that exceeds bodily pleasures lasts only a few days, and diseases that last a long time involve delights that exceed their pains." - PD 4

So an Epicurean would specifically seek out prudent pleasures.

Quote from UnPaid_Landlord

I am of the nature to die. There is no way to escape death.

And for an Epicurean take on death (which I missed in the above post):

"We are born only once and cannot be born twice, and must forever live no more. You don't control tomorrow, yet you postpone joy. Life is ruined by putting things off, and each of us dies without truly living." - VS14

This could be use some re-wording, so it sounds more upbeat, lol...

...perhaps this:

We are born only once, and we cannot predict when we will die - don't postpone your joy or put off truly living this life.

(Maybe I'll need to work on paraphrasing that one a bit better).

UnPaid_Landlord Great outline!

This section popped out at me:

Quote from UnPaid_Landlord

I am of the nature to grow old. There is no way to escape growing old.

I am of the nature to have ill health. There is no way to escape ill health.

I am of the nature to die. There is no way to escape death.

All that is dear to me and everyone I love are of the nature to change

My actions are my only true belongings and I can't escape their consequences.

While these are somewhat true, I don't think Epicureans would say these kinds of things. (These sound Buddhist?...and they sound a bit depressing to me.)

Here is an Epicurean take on old age:

"It is not the young man who is most happy, but the old man who has lived beautifully; for despite being at his very peak the young man stumbles around as if he were of many minds, whereas the old man has settled into old age as if in a harbor, secure in his gratitude for the good things he was once unsure of." - VS 17

Here is an Epicurean take on ill health:

"Pain does not last continuously in the flesh; instead, the sharpest pain lasts the shortest time, a pain that exceeds bodily pleasures lasts only a few days, and diseases that last a long time involve delights that exceed their pains." - PD 4

Here is an Epicurean take on impermenance:

"The body cries out to not be hungry, not be thirsty, not be cold. Anyone who has these things, and who is confident of continuing to have them, can rival the gods for happiness." - VS 33

...and...

"Misfortune must be cured through gratitude for what has been lost and the knowledge that it is impossible to change what has happened." - VS 55

Here is an Epicurean take on virtuous actions:

"It is not possible to live joyously without also living wisely and beautifully and rightly, nor to live wisely and beautifully and rightly without living joyously; and whoever lacks this cannot live joyously." - PD 5

(All quotes above are Peter Saint-Andre translation).

I am wondering what the "score card" is on this? How many translations say "will" cry out and how many "will not" cry out?

Tomorrow night is our First Monday Zoom Discussion!

The discussion topic is "Guilty Pleasures"...and we'll discuss things like: What qualifies as a "guilty pleasure"...according to whom...and why...what does Epicurus say about moderation...what about guilt/shame...and what was up with Seneca when he said: "Do everything as if Epicurus was watching".

Message me if you need the link...

...hope to see you there!

I just found this which mentions Epicurus at the start yet brings up other philosophers.

It is food for thought about about the role of philosophy:

Existential doubts? Go see a philosopher instead of a psychologist

Philosophical consultation has long operated in the shadows, aiming to resolve crucial dilemmas and foster life tolerance rather than treat mental health issues

english.elpais.com

I don't know if there is a glitch in the software, but at times it appears that private conversations (private messages) go "unread"... and there could be one of the following causes:

1. The android version of the forum doesn't make it very obvious when there is a new private conversation...and either the notification isn't seen or it isn't even showing a notification.

2. The individual is "ignoring" the little red dot that indicates that there is a new message.

3. The message has been read, but the system is registering it as "unread".

So...just a heads up to newer members...to double-check for new private conversations.

Regarding the discussion topic... I'll be presenting some "questions" to spur on a lively and fun discussion.

Hi Everyone, Coming up next Monday on July 1st is our next "First Monday Epicurean Philosophy Hour - Meet-and-Greet and Discussion" - Via Zoom, 8pm ET.

Open to all forum members! And we especially invite those who are new to the forum! This is a great way to meet, converse, and engage with others who are studying the philosophy of Epicurus.

Agenda:

• Welcome (and introductions)
• Discuss some of the lastest popular threads on the forum
• Special discussion topic (includes a very short presentation to introduce the topic)

This month's topic: "Guilty pleasures"? From PD8 to Seneca's "Do everything as if Epicurus were watching you."

We'll be using the same link as last month.

If you have not yet attended a Zoom, please let us know here if you are interested (or send a private message to Cassius or myself) and we will get the link to you by private message (no later than the day before the meeting).

Looking forward to seeing you there!

Then the next question is how much time to invest in each category? But this will be different for each person, depending on how important they feel it is to know details, as well as if they enjoy the study of science.

For myself, I'm thinking something like this, regarding how much time to invest:

Natural Science - 20% (My reasoning is that every modern person went to school (and many of us went to college) and so we are already familiar with important aspects of science and physics. It actually might make sense to spend some time reviewing the modern understanding of the physics of atoms, etc, if we want accurate details on which to base our materialist view).

Canonics - 20% (I am still currently in the process of trying to understand Epicurean canonics, and this section would also include how to make inferences.)

Ethics - 60% (Vain is the word of the philosopher which does not heal any suffering of man. (...and does not lead to a good life). This is where the importance is at, for me.)

And, this is all relevant to creating teaching materials, because each person could put more or less importance on each category...thereby creating a very different outline for study.

I made this chart to illustrate an estimation of the breakdown of the extant texts into the catagories of Ethics, Canonics, and Natural Science. Are these percentages correct? Or would there be a better estimation of the breakdown?

Quote from Julia

Kalosyni Your ever-changing avatar pictures are all very pretty!

Thanks! I need to try to go at least a month now without changing it, lol

Quote from Julia

It might be worthwhile shifting more activity towards building/growing the wiki and other more organised knowledge bases.

Yes, and your idea of creating a list of narrations/audio is a good one .

I very much enjoy this reading by Joshua...there is so much here on the forum that it may not have been noticed:

Post

RE: New Audio Version of Torquatus' Presentation of Epicurean Ethics - Read By Joshua

We are very pleased to be able to present to you, here at the end of 2021, one of the best and most helpful audio presentations of an ancient Epicurean text available anywhere.

youtu.be/ZVGgP55_wUY


The "Torquatus" narrative of Epicurean Philosophy found in Book One of Cicero's "On Ends" is probably the most detailed and important summaries of Epicurean Ethics that survives from the ancient world. In important respects it is more detailed and clear than even Epicurus' own "Letter to Menoeceus."…

Cassius

December 28, 2021 at 7:54 PM

Happy Summer Solstice!

The following post is a reposting from last night's zoom thread:

Thinking that perhaps my "prolepsis" of the phrase "canon of truth" is incorrect, especially if it is really refering not to "truth" but to aletheia:

Aletheia is variously translated as "unconcealedness", "disclosure", "revealing", or "unclosedness". The literal meaning of the word ἀ–λήθεια is "the state of not being hidden; the state of being evident." It also means factuality or reality.

Source: Wikipedia

---------------

So the canon is not the method of how we get to "that which is true" but how we get to "that which is revealed"... am I wrong in this?

Happy Twentieth Everyone!

...and Happy Summer Solstice!

I just now edited my post above (post number 2) to create more clarity.