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.
Tonight at 8pm, we will cover Vatican Saying 26 & 27, please join us. (Post here in this thread if you need to get the Zoom link).
VS26. You must understand that whether the discourse be long or short it tends to the same end.
VS27. In the case of other occupations the fruit (of one's labors) comes upon completion of a task while (in the case) of philosophy pleasure is concurrent with knowledge because enjoyment does not come after learning but at the same time (with) learning.
Thank you everyone for your contributions. I will digest these suggestions and add in some of them. It does seem that everyone has their way of slicing and dicing, so there really isn't one "right" formula. Anyone can contribute here...and/or create individual personal outlines over in that section (since I may not add in everything that has been suggested).
Epicurean Philosophy Happy Hour is coming up Monday evening 8pm - open to all forum members. Let's celebrate summer with an opportunity to share about happy memories or enjoyable experiences (if you feel like it would be enjoyable to do so). Then we'll follow that with open discussion on Epicurean philosophy.
Thanks for the RSVPs so far!
Any other RSVPs?
8. Study natural science and practice the Epicurean ethics together with those of like mind.
This would also include application of "canonics".
And perhaps for modern day Epicureans this would also include studying climate change so as to understand the rate in which climate is changing (for the sake of understanding safety).
Edit Note: See post 10 below for an updated version.
**************************************************
I am in the process of brainstorming...and would especially appreciate any ideas for "steps" or descriptions (and maybe it needs more than 7 steps?) from Joshua, Don, Godfrey, Martin, TauPhi, Onenski, and kochiekoch.
The following "Seven Steps to the Ethics of Epicurus" is a work in progress:
1. The nature of the world, the soul, death, and god(s) - The basis of everything is atoms and void and nothing comes from nothing - there are no supernatural elements or forces, no afterlife, and no angry gods. Death is natural and not something to dread.
2. Pleasure is the guide of life. Pleasure is good and pain is evil. But at times the painful is chosen if it prevents a worse pain or leads to a greater pleasure or to the health and happiness of the soul. The virtues are useful when they lead to pleasure and health.
3. Choices and avoidances according three categories -- natural & necessary for health of the body and the soul; natural but not necessary (a variation of sensation); unnatural and unnecessary.
4. Friendship
5. Safety
6. Justice
7. The gods are blissful beings who are to be emulated
8. Study natural science and practice the Epicurean ethics together with those of like mind.
I can't believe even the staunchest ancient Epicurean really thought that **everything** Epicurus said was blindingly unique. We all know much of what Epicurus taught he learned from starts others had made, such as Democritus. So it's only natural that smart people do regularly hit on similar thoughts. The uniqueness of Epicurus comes through in certain particular ways, and it's probably most helpful for us to think about those particular ways and the reasons for them. That's the obvious way to sniff out when someone who's talking - for example - about "virtue" is speaking as an Epicurean or Stoic or whatever.
It does seem that having a basic knowledge of all the ancient philosophies could be helpful.
Perhaps...the uniqueness of Epicurus is deconstructing and replacing the "perfect" and the "ideal" and properly placing pleasure (together with the removal of pain) as the best guide to a good life. If you think about it, it is only the wealthy who can try to buy perfection (or vain opinions) in the lifestyle that they pursue. (And then sometimes others who erroneously envy the wealthy). But the necessary pleasures required by nature are easy to procure.
He references the similarity to VS54:
54. Do not pretend to love and practice wisdom, but love and practice wisdom in reality; for we need not the appearance of health but true health.
There is also the reference to health in the Letter to Menoeceus, in the opening:
"Let no one put off the love and practice of wisdom when young, nor grow tired of it when old. For it is never too early or too late for the health of the soul."
You can view a modelling of the architecture, which shows it was a stoa:
A good article covering ancient skepticism -- There were two distinct traditions or movements of skeptical thought: Pyrrhonian and Academic.
While ideas that can loosely be called skeptical may be found from very early in Greek philosophy, skepticism as an organized method of thinking in Greco-Roman antiquity appears in the post-Aristotelian period. There are two distinct traditions or movements of skeptical thought: Pyrrhonian and Academic. The hallmark of ancient Greco-Roman skepticism, in both traditions, is suspension of judgement, brought about by the juxtaposition of equally persuasive opposing views on any given question. In the Pyrrhonist version, but not the Academic, this is claimed to have a practical benefit: ataraxia or tranquility. In both traditions, however, skepticism is understood not merely as a topic of theoretical reflection, but as something to be lived. The Pyrrhonian tradition claimed inspiration from Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360–270 BCE), who is usually considered the first Greek skeptic. However, the exact nature of Pyrrho’s thinking is very hard to reconstruct, given the scarcity of the evidence. Pyrrho’s direct influence seems to have been short-lived. But shortly after Pyrrho another skeptical movement arose in the Academy, the school founded by Plato. The first head of the Academy to take the school in a skeptical direction was Arcesilaus of Pitane (316/5–241/0 BCE). Whether Pyrrho was an influence on him is a disputed question. But some aspects of Socrates’ activity, as Plato portrays him, might seem to encourage skepticism, and Arcesilaus is said to have acknowledged this influence. The skeptical Academy lasted for roughly two centuries, its other major figure being Carneades of Cyrene (214–129/8 BCE). By the early 1st century BCE the skepticism of the Academy seems to have moderated considerably, and it was at this point that the Academy itself, as an institution, came to an end. But in reaction to this softening of the skeptical attitude came a new skeptical movement led by Aenesidemus of Cnossos (dates uncertain, but active in the early first century BCE), repudiating the Academy and instead identifying itself with Pyrrho. This later Pyrrhonian movement continued for roughly three centuries. We know the names of a few Pyrrhonists. But the only complete Pyrrhonist works we have are the extensive surviving writings of Sextus Empiricus (probably late 2nd or early 3rd century CE). Because Oxford Bibliographies for Pyrrho of Elis and The Academy already exist, this bibliography is somewhat weighted toward the later Pyrrhonist tradition stemming from Aenesidemus.
It says: "In both traditions, however, skepticism is understood not merely as a topic of theoretical reflection, but as something to be lived."
And this is what would be different from Epicureanism -- as it seems that theoretical reflection is at times contained within Epicureanism?
So, I don't think πενία should be interpreted as abject poverty or living on the edge of starvation and similar scenarios.
Your translation of this brings up a reminder regarding translations. Cassius are we going to assemble a recommended translation at some point on VSs and PDs?
Thanks Don, turns out that we covered this in last night's Zoom (but I had forgotten you had posted your translation on it) and so hoping kochiekoch, TauPhi, Martin, Cassius take note of this thread. (and Onenski also).
Parcus has a connotation of frugality and thriftiness. I can see Epicurus hammering that home, that we don't need great wealth to find pleasure, to be happy.
It reads from this that we can think of the goal of nature is to live a pleasant life -- and this would be more like quiet pleasure rather than over-the-top pleasure (which requires wealth).
It is surprising to me that 67 percent of all Americans believe in heaven - and indicates that many people believe that some aspect of the soul continues on after death.
Using Cassius' new outline on Lucretius we can read about the Epicurean understanding of the soul:
Here is an interesting article:
Excerpt:
Story Highlights
- 74% believe in God, 69% angels, 67% heaven, 59% hell, 58% the devil
- Nearly three in 10 do not believe in hell or the devil
- Belief greatest among frequent churchgoers, Protestants, Republicans
The percentages of Americans who believe in each of five religious entities -- God, angels, heaven, hell and the devil -- have edged downward by three to five percentage points since 2016. Still, majorities believe in each, ranging from a high of 74% believing in God to lows of 59% for hell and 58% for the devil. About two-thirds each believe in angels (69%) and heaven (67%).
Hi Everyone,
Next Monday is the first Monday of September, and we will be having another Epicurean Philosophy Happy Hour.
I'd like to start with some social discussion such as "How was your summer?" and "Did you go on any vacations?" or "What was a memorable summertime event or experience?" - since we know that the mental pleasure of memory is greatly enhanced by telling others about our happy memories. And then after that open it up to Epicurean philosophy topics.
Everyone, please RSVP here in this thread if you think that you will likely be attending -- It's Labor Day, and can imagine that some of you may have some holiday plans and so may not be able to attend...so an RSVP will help us out. 
(Feel free to bring a beverage of some kind to sip on during the Zoom).
Asclepiades welcome to the forum
2. The description of Epicurus as quite a despotic figure with a strong will to dominate feeble minded and expand his influence by any means necessary, including missionary work.
The origin of this is from Martha Nussbaum?
(2) the issue of "dogmatism" vs "skepticism" in Epicurus is definitely there, and dedicated skeptics are definitely going to have a problem with Epicurus.
When reading and studying the Epicurean maxims, there are two ways to "listen" to them:
1) as if they were a kind of "ultimatum" and "absolute" (this is an incorrect way in my opinion).
-or-
2) something to contemplate and to apply as needed in the manner of a "medicine" or a therapeutic -- for example, "death is nothing to us" is not some kind of "absolute truth" but a way of thinking after applying reason...and likewise for other maxims.
1. A frequent parallel or comparison with Christianity
I do not like this aspect of DeWitt myself, and I know that there are others here on the forum who also feel the same way.
I have been reading the book very slowly and I suddenly realised that if this had been my first introduction to the philosophy of Epicurus, I might have given it a pass
I personally think that it is intermediate/advanced reading, because it seems to me that you need to know a little bit already (and it's for people who have time for reading long and "wordy" explanations).
As a study method, I personally think sticking with studying and discussing the extant texts is the best way to go for both beginning and intermediate students of Epicurus.
The following are a collection of all the Principle Doctrines and Vatican Sayings on Friendship:
(For reference puposes on the discussion of developing friendship).
PD27: Of all the things which wisdom acquires to produce the blessedness of the complete life, far the greatest is the possession of friendship.
PD28: The same knowledge that makes one confident that nothing dreadful is eternal or long-lasting also recognizes, in the face of these limited evils, the security afforded by friendship.
VS23: Every friendship is worth choosing for its own sake, though it takes its origin from the benefits.
VS28: We must not approve either those who are always ready for friendship, or those who hang back, but for friendship’s sake we must run risks.
VS34: It is not so much our friends' help that helps us, as it is the confidence of their help.
VS39: He is no friend who is continually asking for help, nor he who never associates help with friendship. For the former barters kindly feeling for a practical return, and the latter destroys the hope of good in the future.
VS52: Friendship dances around the world, bidding us all to awaken to the recognition of happiness.
VS56: The wise man feels no more pain, when being tortured himself than when his friend is tortured.
VS57: On occasion a man will die for his friend, for if he betrays his friend, his whole life will be confounded by distrust and completely upset.
VS66: Let us show our feeling for our lost friends, not by lamentation, but by meditation.
VS78: The truly noble man busies himself chiefly with wisdom and friendship, of which the one is an understandable good but the other is immortal.
Latest change on the order of the forum sub-sections - The Epicurean lifestyle and self-improvement folder no longer has its own separate section - It has now been moved under Ethics.
This alternate translation of VS 15:
15. We value our characters as our own personal possessions, whether they are good and envied by men or not. We must regard our neighbours’ characters thus too, if they are respectable. - Inwood & Gerson translation.
(Source)
I was contemplating respect and what causes the loss of respect, which then points to what is needed to maintain respect. Virtues help us maintain respect and maintain good connections with others, and we develop and maintain them because they lead to greater pleasure and less pain. They are practical and down-to-earth, and we don't develop them to prove we are "good".
And found an article, and here is an excerpt:
Respect forms an integral pillar in the foundation of any relationship, whether personal or professional. Without respect, trust crumbles, and connections fade. Therefore, understanding and maintaining a level of care becomes essential for personal growth, career advancement, and overall happiness. Sadly, certain habits can erode this critical value, leading to an undesirable loss of respect.
The article continues with a list of habits which erode the respect of others.
- Dishonesty: Honesty remains an irreplaceable cornerstone in building respect. However, repeated acts of dishonesty, such as lying or withholding the truth, can fast-track you to losing respect. Not only does it breed mistrust, but it also questions one’s integrity, making others hesitant to rely on or confide in you.
- Unreliability: Promises made must be promises kept. By not honoring commitments or missing deadlines, you paint a picture of someone others can’t depend on. Inconsistency undermines trust and signals that you lack respect for others’ time, resources, or feelings.
- Interrupting Others: Respectful communication includes active listening. Consistently interrupting or talking over others disregards their perspective and makes them feel unimportant. Show respect by allowing others to express their thoughts without intrusion.
- Negativity and Constant Complaining: While everyone has bad days, a continuous stream of negativity or complaining can drain the energy of those around you. It displays a lack of adaptability and resilience, which can result in diminished respect over time.
- Being Judgmental: Respect includes accepting and appreciating others’ differences. By being overly critical or dismissive of others’ views or lifestyles, you lack understanding and open-mindedness, resulting in a loss of respect.
- Disrespecting Others’ Time: Punctuality signifies respect for others’ time. Habitual lateness, extended response times, or frequent rescheduling can imply that you view your time as more valuable than others.
- Gossiping: Spreading rumors or discussing others’ private matters creates an atmosphere of mistrust. Gossiping shows a lack of respect for the privacy of others, ultimately leading to diminished care for the gossiper.
- Being Arrogant or Overly Proud: Confidence is attractive, but arrogance is off-putting. A lack of humility, exaggerated self-importance, or an inability to accept constructive criticism can decrease the respect others have for you.
- Ignoring or Dismissing Others’ Feelings: Empathy is crucial in human interactions. Ignoring or dismissing others’ feelings shows a lack of understanding and compassion, eroding respect.
- Being Manipulative or Using People: Utilizing others for personal gain without considering their feelings or interests displays a lack of empathy and respect, resulting in a similar lack of respect for you.
- Not Taking Responsibility for Your Actions: Avoiding accountability or blaming others for your mistakes sends the message that you lack maturity and integrity. Taking responsibility, on the other hand, earns respect and builds trust.
Another possible cause of the decline: neoplatonism
... the Roman religious revolution preceded Constantine the Great’s rule, and it was not primarily about Christianity.
Historians’ estimates for the number of Christians during Constantine’s reign vary, but they tend to hover between less than 5% to 10% of the population at the most. The Christians up to this point had been a heavily persecuted group, particularly under Emperor Diocletian. If Constantine’s support of the Christian religion was a pragmatic choice, it cannot have been because Christianity was suddenly the largest religion.
It is popularly believed that Christianity spread primarily amongst the poor, the enslaved, and women first before it caught on with the Roman aristocracy. Jesus’ belief that the downtrodden should be cared for was part of its appeal to various groups of disenfranchised people.
On the other hand, while the Christian religion was probably not yet massive, mystery cults and foreign religions were replacing traditional pantheism with lightning speed.
This was due in part to a philosophical movement called Neoplatonism. From the 3rd century onwards, this school of philosophy basically went unchallenged and supplanted all others. Traditional philosophical education for the aristocratic population of the late Roman Empire would often entail studying at the feet of one of the many Neoplatonist philosophers.
This school is very important for understanding late Roman culture and religion. Its system of philosophy taught that, even if there are other Godlike beings, there is primarily one single all-encompassing ineffable Godhead, which is connected to the divine intellect. They were also concerned with the status of the soul of man in a divine hierarchy. These ideas were, in effect, a religious interpretation of Plato.
Small things like the loss of manuscripts could have had an effect:
Though less famous than the purported burning of the Library of Alexandria, the great fire that tore through central Rome in 192 CE resulted in a similarly profound loss for ancient Greek and Roman scholarship. The true cost of this fire became clear to historians in 2005, when a text believed lost for centuries was unexpectedly rediscovered in a Greek monastery. Titled “On Consolation from Grief” and written in the aftermath of the blaze by Galen—court physician to several Roman emperors—the work does more than chronicle an unfortunate accident.
