Wow, Don amazing investigation and translation work.
In an above post I quoted a Greer translation, and I should mention what Greer says in his prologue -- that he used the translations of others: Bailey, vod der Muehll, Usner, and Hicks, and that is it "not so much a translation as a paraphrase".
So we probably should be careful with "translations" like this?
VS63: "There is also a limit to frugality. The man unable to consider this suffers a similar end as the man who indulges in excess." --Eugene O'Connor
VS63: "There is also a limit in simple living. He who fails to heed this limit falls into an error as great as that of the man who gives way to extravagance." --Russel M. Greer
**********
I have (on loan from a friend) "The Essential Epicurus" by O'Connor.
And found "Letters, Principle Doctrines and Vatican Sayings: Epicurus" by Greer -- on Archive.com
The quote in post 58 above: "The tripartite brain is still a sound model in neurobiology".
I found this interesting article for people who want to dive into the details:
And for further commentary:
Ths interesting comment from the psychology.stackexchange:
There isn’t a new model, exactly, since as the poster stated, the brain doesn’t operate as a model and earlier versions of brain structures simply modify themselves to evolve— it’s one brain. Meaning, one’s “lizard brain” is actually just a mammalian brain now. The new model perhaps is The Human Brain? But given that the Triune model was most popularized by lawyers needing it for defense against emotional (irrational) behavior and psychologists adopted it for explanation of emotional dysregulation, then likely the best replacement is theory about emotion. Emotions are not well understood, and there are several theories about them, but the latest and most provocative development is the Theory of Constructed Emotion. See Barrett-Feldman et al.
Welcome to the forum ScottW 
We are starting a monthly Friday Night Epicurean Happy Hour and it is open to new members. We haven't set a date yet, but you can read about it here.
Also, if you haven't already had a chance to listen to one of our podcasts, here is a good one to try.
Hi Everyone! We will be having our next Epicurean Happy Hour sometime soon, and if you are interested in attending please let us know here in this thread. It will be on a Friday night at 8pm ET (or 8:30pm ET depending on if we have folks on the west coast), some time in February. This meeting is open to all forum members and is especially geared toward Level 1 and new members. If we get at least two Level 1 members who are interested in attending, we will move forward and schedule a meeting.
If you are interested in attending or have any questions, please post here is this thread, thank you
It seems to me they're using "anxiety" to mean several different things because the word attracts attention.
It looks like it is very important to define the words we use, otherwise it all gets very muddy.
Maybe for our purposes here in what we understand as Epicurean teachings, instead of anxiety we could use the word "worry"?
But then I wonder, should everyone try to live a worry-free life? Is it even possible? Would a worry-free life be worth living? What would you have to sacrifice to live completely worry-free?
Should questions like these remain a personal exploration, so there is no right or wrong or absolute answer that applies to everyone or to every time and place? Or is this a helpful line of discussion amongst friends? (Or is it making things more confusing than they need to be?)
There is basically no situation in which anxiety is more useful than a calm presence of mind.
An excerpt from a New York Times article has this to say:
"Having some anxiety — especially when faced with a stressful situation — isn’t necessarily bad and can actually be helpful, experts say."
The article goes on to say:
"Anxiety is an uncomfortable emotion, often fueled by uncertainty. It can create intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear, not just about stressful events but also about everyday situations. There are usually physical symptoms too, like fast heart rate, muscle tension, rapid breathing, sweating and fatigue.
Too much anxiety can be debilitating. But a normal amount is meant to help keep us safe, experts say.
“The emotion of anxiety and the underlying physiological stress response evolved to protect us,” Wendy Suzuki, a neuroscientist and the author of “Good Anxiety,” said."
And this:
"A certain degree of anxiety can help people anticipate obstacles, remain cautious and stay organized, said Ellen Hendriksen, a clinical psychologist in Boston and the author of “How to Be Yourself: Quiet Your Inner Critic and Rise Above Social Anxiety.”
Read the full article here:
Welcome to the forum MaxImpala
As far as copyright goes on images, not sure if you modify something enough from the original, but even then there could still be copyright issues.
I think the "militant look" combined with the leaping pig has some definite flair to it
I decided to go with something different for my profile. I haven't changed my profile picture in a long time, because it is hard to settle into one picture. I think I am going to try to stick with this one (and not keep trying more).
Nike, the Goddess of Victory holding up an image of Epicurus (unfortuately it got a bit blurry since I am not using a very good app).
It is a tiny Epicurus bust on the hat, but the image is a bit small/slightly blurry. I found the basic pig on the internet, and changed the color of the neck scarf, altered the smile, and added the hat pin.
Cassius most importantly that the whole thing began with the Humphries translation. As I was listening to an audio recording of Humphries translation book 1 today, I was shocked by it when it seemed to say: by the will of God, nothing comes from nothing. (book 1 passage 146)
Also starting in passage 102, it says "we do not know the nature of the soul" implying skeptism. The "we" is totally incorrect because it is talking about the misleading nature of others. And I see in other translations it uses "they".
I don't have a printed copy available to show the actual words of those two passages. Does anyone have that?
My current advice is to not trust Humphries translation.
Here is a series of articles from 2013, from The Guardian website. (I have not read these yet but they look good).
The website says: "Emma Woolerton wrote her PhD on Lucretius at Cambridge, where she taught for several years. She now works in London."
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Part 5:
Part 6:
Part 7:
Part 8:
Part 9:
And when I notice that I have an extravagant one, I relax, because I see that I don't need it (though I'll enjoy it if I get it).
Yet...perhaps...this would be an evaluation after the fact of knowing that: 1) it isn't possible to get it, or 2) it will cause a great amount of pain without having any lasting benefit to long-term well-being or security -- In which case, for my own self, might simply label as "un-necessary".
Because it almost feels like, for me the word "extravagant" is for things that I wouldn't actually choose anyway -- for example: a chocolate cupcake covered in pink icing. However, I would not label a scoop of ice cream as extravagant, since there are several ice cream parlors in my area (and instead of buying a whole half gallon from the grocery store and keeping it my freezer, then I instead choose to buy a scoop at at time, maybe twice a month.)
Wishing you a Happy Birthday EricR
Here is an interesting article on when you can see the new moon crescent, and in ancient times that would be the start of the month (and if I remember correctly the start of the day):
I think this is also where the word "empty" gets used, right? And I find that word also not up to the task of being clear.
Actually that is very interesting to me...because then you can ask "empty of what?"
Empty of benefit? Empty of true pleasure?
Then you can ask yourself questions like:
Does it matter if I eat hot oatmeal or cold cereal for breakfast.
Does it matter if I wear a white t-shirt or a blue t-shirt tomorrow.
Does it matter if I graduate from college or drop out to work a job -- depends on what job.
And you can ask yourself, further if it will matter 3 months or a year from now if I go to that party or not -- whether or not to procrastinate on studying for an upcoming exam.
So then it can help you determine what things you are willing to put effort into for long-term benefit and long-term security.
Whether "groundless" is appropriate...
The internet definition of groundless = "not based on any good reason". And I really would want to know the original Greek word used? Don if you know?
I need to track where I read something about the view of deeming something as groundless -- after the fact or while thinking through/imagining (placing before the eyes) -- and then one sees that it 1) it causes a lot of pain and no pleasure, or 2) it is impossible to get.
For example: if a person said: "Oh how I wish I could go on a flight on Blue Origin, but it costs $1.25 million per passenger so I can't afford to do it." So then one would then reason about how this desire is not necessary for a happy life AND then replace that desire with something easier to get. Or another (more down to earth) example: if someone has very limited finances, but says "Oh it would be so nice to go to drive to a resort town on the ocean, but hotels are so expensive these days and I need to be careful about not spending away my limited savings." -- and then sees that the basic "deeper" human desire is for exploration (or for learning, experiencing, novelty, or relaxation) then finding something else such as exploring things and going to museums in one's own city, or finding a nice park with a river or lake.
This might be the kind of thing that we need to develop clear presentations on and this could eventually be part of a daily reader/guidebook -- or an "Epicurean Basic Training".
Here is a new graphic. I removed the labels "extravagent" and "corrosive" because for me it doesn't seem correct to abstractly label anything, it must be applied with in a given condition, environment, and situation.
*******************************************
Edit note: 7:51pm ET -- I'm not sure this graphic makes sense now without the labels in the very first graphic in post 1 above (especially the image of the credit cards).
Briefly, Epicurus' portrait was intentionally symbolic and not merely representational. It had the function of attracting new people to the School. Additionally (and as a speculation of Frischer) this recruitment worked attracting a specific psychological profile.
The idea is that some people have a major tendency to believe in epicurean premises (those who have more tendency to trust in their senses, for example) than others. Frischer uses some psychoanalytic framework (from Carl Jung) to make this suggestion (which I think is too speculative, by the way).
regarding some ways to think about art for outreach.
I've been pondering the use of the image of Epicurus as a symbol of the Epicurean philosophy. But it is also very close to a kind of "hero worship", which I personally feel troubling. Perhaps as modern Epicureans we need to develop a symbol which comes to stand for observation by the senses and also "pleasure as telos". And maybe it would be something along the lines of greek letter(s) -- I think Nate was working on some symbols but need to find those.
The image of Epicurus doesn't mean anything to people who don't know who Epicurus is and who are not "Epicureans".
I used this image (below) for the past 20th, and potentially will use for future announcements, which Cassius also places announcements onto the Facebook group. As I read what Diogenes Laertius says about the will of Epicurus and his wishes for the 20th, including for the remembrance of Metrodorus, and other days remembering his brothers and Polyaenus, then it comes to me that there were very different cultural rituals practiced in ancient Greece. I guess I am still uncertain about the focus on Epicurus' image.
