Posts by Kalosyni

For all practical purposes "quantum foam" is still closer to "nothing".

This thread may be relevant...on Asimov's Relativity of Wrong:

Thread

Isaac Asimov's Essay "The Relativity of Wrong" (Including Criticism of Socrates And Considering Proper Standards of Correctness)

Today a friend referred me to an essay by Isaac Asimov entitled "The Relativity of Wrong" with which I was not previously familiar. It contains of Socrates which seems right in line with the Epicurean perspective. Even more than that, it contains an analysis of what it means to be "right" or "wrong" that I think is probably also very consistent with Epicurus' perspective. Here's a good summary of the point from Wikipedia ("In the title essay, Asimov argues that there exist degrees of…

Cassius

August 30, 2024 at 8:51 AM

This presents Lucretius' writing as intensifying rhetorical elements already present in the work of Epicurus:

Quote

Alleged incompatibility of Epicurus’ philosophy with rhetoric has led modern scholars to isolate rhetorical procedures in Lucretius’ De rerum natura and regard them as non-Epicurean, accessory features. This study of Lucretius’ rhetorical procedures is based on a wider understanding of the term rhetoric, not limited to the genre of oratory. In a fresh discussion of the questions of provenance and the role of the most important formal procedures of exposition in De rerum natura the author argues that instead of injecting rhetorical strategies from non-Epicurean sources, Lucretius in fact intensified rhetorical elements already present in the work of Epicurus. These elements are used for the purpose of explanation, and function as cognitive and mnemonic aids for the reader.

The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius’ <i>De rerum natura</i>

"The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius’ <i>De rerum natura</i>" published on 25 Jun 2008 by Brill.

brill.com

There already exists some information on the forum about the early manuscripts (but could not find that thread) so posting this in a new thread.

Quote

This manuscript distinguishes itself by the spacious layout of the page. In spite of its large dimensions, the page counts only twenty lines. The ample spacing does full justice to the excellent Carolingian minuscule, the new script which was developed towards the end of the 8th century. As happened so often, this original manuscript was corrected afterwards. Sometimes this was done by comparing the copied text carefully with the exemplar, the book which served as a model for the copy. At other times the corrector would use his own judgment. Of course it was desirable to save the book's appearance as much as possible. In the case of parchment this is not difficult, for the writing is easily scratched out with a knife. This is what the corrector of this Lucretius manuscript did. One alteration on the presented page, folio 22r., immediately catches the eye, because the corrector replaced one single line by two new ones, marring the layout of the page in the process. The corrector's adjustments are easily recognizable, because he used another script, the so-called Insular script, which originated in England and Ireland.

We even know the corrector’s name. Bischoff discovered that the writing must be of the hand of the learned Irish monk Dungal, who had been invited to the continent by Charlemagne. The provenance of the manuscript from the circles nearest to the emperor himself explains the magnificent design of the book.

Scribe and corrector — Highlights — Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections — Koninklijke Bibliotheek

Welcome to the forum sulaimanaarbi

You might like this very good introductory video of 5 major points, made by Cassius some time ago:

And there is also this recent one with 11 Key Points posted four months ago:

Welcome to the forum briefvacation and looks like your first post is over in this thread.

Here in this welcome thread, we have set this up as a place to introduce yourself to the forum community - you can tell us your location (what region or country you are in), and tell us a little about yourself and your personal background in reading Epicurean texts. It would also be helpful if you could tell us how you found this forum, and any particular areas of interest that you have which would help us make sure that your questions and thoughts are addressed.

Thank you

Hi Everyone!

First Monday is on November 4th, 8pm ET -- Remember that USA ends daylight savings time by turning the clocks one hour back on November 3rd.

Agenda: Introductions and "meet-and-greet", discuss latest forum threads and the evening's discussion topic, with time for any questions on Epicurean philosophy. Meeting is open to all forum members.

The following is from the front page of the forum (and wiki) in which there are 11 Key Points on Epicurean Philosophy. This is the overview for the first point, "Nothing Can Be Created From Nothing" (our discussion topic for the evening):

Working solely with the science available two thousand years ago, Epicurus observed that nothing ever arises from nothing, and nothing is ever completely destroyed to nothing. From this Epicurus deduced the existence of atoms - elemental particles moving through empty space from which over time all things are made and return. Given that nothing we observe ever comes into existence except through pre-existing atoms, Epicurus concluded that the universe as a whole has always existed, and that while bodies come and go, there was never a time before the universe as a whole came into being.

Given that the universe has always existed, we can firmly reject the contention that the universe was created at some point in time by supernatural forces. All that we see around us is a result of the natural movement of atoms through void over time. This does not mean that only the atoms are real, however, because Nature tells us that bodies made from atoms are also real . More than anything else, this commitment to the true reality of Nature, and the rejection of all notions of the supernatural, is the starting point for everything else in the Epicurean worldview.

As Epicurus wrote to Herodotus: "Nothing is created out of that which does not exist: for if it were, everything would be created out of everything with no need of seeds." (Bailey - line 38) This is the way Epicurus teaches us to reason - always stating the evidence behind our conclusions, and never accepting any possibilities based on pure speculation or wishful thinking. The atomic basis of the universe explains how all that we see around us came into existence neither randomly or chaotically, but naturally as a result of elemental particles moving through space. The properties of atoms, and not the dictates of any supernatural forces, determines what can, and what cannot, come into being.

Link to Nothing Can Be Created From Nothing Sub-forum / Link to the front page with list of 11 Key Points

Hope to see you there!

So if Lucretius criticized Epicurean opponents, the Stoics (and Platonists?) then that is where it is satire (which Cassius pointed out in post 8 above).

And does Lucretius ridicule those who believe pleasure exists in excess riches and power?

I found this:

Quote

satire, artistic form, chiefly literary and dramatic, in which human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, parody, caricature, or other methods, sometimes with an intent to inspire social reform.

Satire is a protean term. Together with its derivatives, it is one of the most heavily worked literary designations and one of the most imprecise. The great English lexicographer Samuel Johnson defined satire as “a poem in which wickedness or folly is censured,” and more elaborate definitions are rarely more satisfactory. No strict definition can encompass the complexity of a word that signifies, on one hand, a kind of literature—as when one speaks of the satires of the Roman poet Horace or calls the American novelist Nathanael West’s A Cool Million a satire—and, on the other, a mocking spirit or tone that manifests itself in many literary genres but can also enter into almost any kind of human communication. Wherever wit is employed to expose something foolish or vicious to criticism, there satire exists, whether it be in song or sermon, in painting or political debate, on television or in the movies. In this sense satire is everywhere.

Quote

By their practice, the great Roman poets Horace and Juvenal set indelibly the lineaments of the genre known as the formal verse satire and, in so doing, exerted pervasive, if often indirect, influence on all subsequent literary satire. They gave laws to the form they established, but it must be said that the laws were very loose indeed.

And this source has more on understanding the genre: https://www.britannica.com/art/satire

I just found this review of a book -- "The Pleasures of Reason in Plato, Aristotle, and the Hellenistic Hedonists" by J. Warren -- and thought to share. Wondering if it would be fruitful to compare and to see how Epicurus was reacting to these earlier philosophies:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24759954

Quote from Root304

November 1st to be a big neighborhood party in our backyards. Inviting all these next door strangers over and get to know them better...

Oh that sounds fun!

On this forum, it is often the case that people hope to find life help and advice from Epicurean ethics. One of the top existential issues in the ethics of Epicurus is how to deal with the fear of death.

It may be difficult for an individual who has experienced family trauma to fully appreciate the existential philosophy that Epicurus presents ("death is nothing to us" which may be heard as sounding "stoic" rather than observation of causation). And if that person hears it as a call to deny emotions and feelings, that will be the incorrect way to apply it. They will likely need to deal with trauma recovery first before they can fully dive into applying the awareness of cause and effect, within applying "death is nothing to fear".

An individual may have experienced low level trauma or high level trauma, and I found this interesting video:

I want to encourage people to get some help if they need it from a professional therapist, and then come back to revisit the existential aspects of Epicurean philosophy.

Also, Epicureans would no doubt see a group of people coming together with a shared worldview of Epicureanism as a kind of secure, supportive, and enjoyable experience. So that group would have behaviors which are safe, loving, caring, happy, and enjoyable (and the opposite of toxic). And so imagining the nurturing of that in oneself and others to share within the group, which would be almost like a second family in which one creates the atmosphere to "live like the gods".

(Edit at 4:20 pm ET in second paragraph).

I might try this one since I have some pears and eggs. I don't have the fish sauce, and thinking of ways to tweek this into a sweeter dessert, and may use butter instead of olive oil.

Patina de Piris (Patina of Pears) — Tasting History

A sweet egg frittata-like dish that has a classic combination of ancient Roman flavors of long pepper, garum, and cumin

www.tastinghistory.com

He seems to be saying that all other poets of that time were writing satire, therefore Lucretius also wrote satire. First of all is that premise correct? (Were all other poets before Lucretius writing satire?) And second of all, his conclusion is a "bandwagon" fallacy. Lucretius could be demonstrating a witty way of speaking of things rather than critical satire.

Happy Birthday Joshua !!!

Last night's Zoom had a very good discussion, and for anyone who attended I recommend reading this article by Elli (linked in the above post of this thread). And also if anyone wants to post any further thoughts.

Welcome to the forum Shierprism

Quote from Shierprism

I'm especially interested in how modern therapies such as ACT or REBT might usefully be plugged into the practice of a modern day Epicurean.

You may have already seen this thread (I myself haven't studied much about ACT except very briefly).

As for REBT, there is this thread, which maybe could use some updating to include more aspects of Epicurean philosophy, such as not jumping to premature conclusions (we see this in canonics that one waits to see all the possible explanations).

Thanks Patrikios for the above info in previous post.

Some further thoughts...given that there is a clear aspect of the therapeutic benefits from Epicureanism, it is also important to remember that different people need different things, and this can have a basis in temperaments (from a combination of nurture and genetics). So I believe that it is very important to emphasize the movement to pleasure, rather than the movement to tranquility (as some people have no need to become more tranquil)...and because an emphasis on pleasure will include all temperament types:

Here are temperament differences that have been seen in psychology research (source link follows below):

Quote

1. Activity level: This temperament refers to how active a person is. For instance, some individuals feel the need to move constantly. These high-activity individuals tend to move from one physical activity to another. As children, they may have trouble sitting still in class and fidget with their pencils. In contrast, low activity individuals tend to enjoy calmer activities.
2. Biological rhythms: This temperament is associated with the regularity of fulfilling biological needs, such as eating and sleeping. People with regular rhythms tend to stick to routines and have predictable daily patterns. On the other hand, people with irregular rhythms might forget to eat a meal, feel sleepy sometime during the day or not feel sleepy past their bedtime.
3. Sensitivity: Sensitivity refers to the intensity of the perception of certain stimuli. For instance, highly sensitive people may be bothered by many sounds, textures, and bright lights that others don’t even notice.
4. Intensity of reaction: This temperament is associated with how strongly a person reacts to something. High-intensity individuals tend to have powerful reactions to even the slightest situations and create drama. In contrast, low-intensity individuals respond to even a major event as if it isn’t a big deal.
5. Adaptability: Adaptability indicates whether someone can easily adjust to changes in their environment. Highly adaptable individuals can handle unexpected changes with ease. However, slow to adapt individuals may need additional time to feel comfortable with the same change.
6. Approach/withdrawal: Similar to adaptability, this temperament refers to how people tend to approach new situations or changes. People with an approaching style can easily meet new people or try new things. Yet, withdrawing individuals may hang back, observe, and assess the new situation or people before joining in or taking action.
7. Persistence: This trait focuses on how long someone is willing to try and stick to a task. Persistent individuals tend to do whatever they can to reach the finish line. People with low persistence can be overwhelmed by the slightest challenge and give up easily.
8. Distractibility: This trait refers to whether a person tends to be distracted easily. Highly distractible people have difficulties paying attention to a task for long periods. They may also find it challenging to focus on a task when there are distractions in the environment. On the other hand, people with low distractibility can be absorbed in what they are doing, even in the loudest places.
9. Mood: Mood indicates the direction of our feelings. People with positive moods tend to see things from a brighter perspective and appear generally cheerful. In contrast, people with negative moods may have a gloomier attitude.

And the source site has a very good article (including a history about temperaments which first began with Hippocrates).

Temperaments: Definition, Examples, & Types

What are temperaments? Discover the meaning and origins of this concept, and explore its implications for child development and our behaviors.

www.berkeleywellbeing.com

And also something that Onenski said in yesterday's Zoom (paraphrased as I remember it) that we need pleasure when in pain (which includes removal of pain) and we also still need pleasure when no longer in pain. It is just part of human nature.

Happy Twentieth!

Perhaps a new ritual...waking on the morning of the 20th and decorating my Epicurus bust which sits on top of the bookshelf.

Just for fun, a thread for anyone to share thoughts on Halloween through the lens of Epicureanism/Epicurean-worldview...

First off, a fun read on the history of Halloween:

Halloween: Origins, Meaning & Traditions | HISTORY

Halloween originated with the ancient Celtic festival of Samhain and is now a worldwide event. Learn more about Halloween's origins, traditions, interesting…

www.history.com

Halloween appears to be more popular than ever here in the US. And Halloween may, in round-about ways, re-inforce notions of superstition, religion, and beliefs (or hopes) that the soul survives death -- there are the dark/evil essences that accompany any soul surviving death and we need God to save us from those evil forces. And another aspect -- there are the sublimated "Jungian" symbols of evil (ghosts, goblins, witches, etc) -- consciousness rejects the dark aspects of the psyche and personal responsibility for making bad choices by blaming evil forces outside of themselves ("the devil made me do it").

This year I feel like I can more easily ignore the whole cultural phenomenon, since I live rurally and no tricker-treaters will be coming to my door. So come October 31st, I plan on a quiet evening at home. Of course there are memories of past Halloweens in which I passed out candy to kids, and a few in which I dressed up (and one in which I went out to a winery with a friend).

And I suppose everyone's Halloween can be very different depending on one's circumstances.

Please post any thoughts, plans, activities?

Quote from Eikadistes

Quote from Kalosyni

There isn't much on emotions in Epicurean texts.

Definitely check out Philodemus'...

Thanks @Eikadistes I forgot about Philodemus. I have not studied much of his writings, because they are so fragmentary in nature. Appreciating the links you've included in your post.

There isn't much on emotions in Epicurean texts.

Here are some further thoughts, and a website about primary and secondary emotions:

Primary emotions: Joy, Trust, Fear, Surprise, Sadness, Disgust, Anger, Anticipation

Quote

The main difference between primary and secondary emotions is that primary emotions are how we react to events and situations, whereas secondary emotions are reactions to how we feel.

For example, feeling shame (secondary) about feeling fear (primary) in a certain situation. The distinction helps in understanding emotional reactions and their underlying causes more deeply.

Quote

You can also ask yourself whether the emotions receded after the initiating event receded. If the emotion was strong at first but has since diminished, it is likely a primary emotion. If the emotion continues long after the event and interferes with your abilities in the present, it is likely secondary.

Primary and Secondary Emotions: What's The Difference?

Primary emotions are how we react to events and situations, whereas secondary emotions are reactions to how we feel. For example, feeling shame (secondary)…

www.simplypsychology.org