Posts by Kalosyni

Quote from Don

That's how I'm thinking "setting before the eyes" goes except in reverse: "Here's what the video camera would see."

So it is like practicing something in your mind, beforehand?

Quote from Don

This is interesting from a "what was actually going on inside the Epicurean community in ancient times" perspective, but also "how can we resurrect or re-use or re-interpret ancient practices for modern times" perspective. That's one reason why it's important to dig into this.

This fascinating to me, and so some day soon hope to learn more. And there may end up being a similar process within "Nonviolent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg" ...which uses "Observations, Feelings, Needs, and Requests" ...and the first step uses vivid exact description of exactly what happened or what was said...and they say: "describe what the video camera would see" as a way to be very objective.

As we bring in the application of Epicurean principles into daily life, we may need to more effectively base ideas both on specific principles AND on observable sensations, so that we can use the philosophy effectively.

Also it can help everyone here on the forum present their ideas more clearly.

More on using the Toulmin model:

1) The claim, the first element in an argument, is an assertion, thesis or propostion and answers the question: "What do I want to prove?"

2) The grounds, the second element in an argument, are evidence, specific facts or data that support the claim and answer the question: "What do I have to go on?"

3) The warrant, the third element in an argument, yields general support that links the grounds to the claim -- either implied or stated, depending on the audience -- and answers the question: "How do I get from evidence to claim?"

Then further:

4) Is it necessary to add "Backing" ? -- Backing is an additional factor considered very important to the claim. "Is the move from grounds to claim safe and reliable?"

5) Is it necessary to add a "Rebuttal" ? A rebuttal is an exception that might make the claim invalid. "What possibilities might upset the argument? (This might add a new starting point, or claim).

6) Is "Qualification" necessary? With what level of certainty will the evidence be found to effectively support the claim? (adding in words such as "likely", etc.)

Based on this PDF:

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/viewFile/821/810&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjTxbH5t-L1AhX7JDQIHYxACx4QFnoECAkQAg&usg=AOvVaw2Xx3fWmBzQ2EGG0LFq0tnR

Quote from smoothiekiwi

Evidently I want to live- but I shouldn't worry about what will happen in 30 years, because I simply can't influence it.

I have read some studies on climate change which suggest by 2040 some major changes will begin to challenge civilization. Some hedonic choices will need to be made regarding where to live as climate change kicks in...as some places might become too uncomfortable (heat/humidity) or too dangerous due to floods/wild fires. Civilization will continue as long as modern agriculture and infrastructure can keep up with the changing climate. But I think it will be important to keep on top of the science. Avoid living in low lying areas which could flood, as we have already seen this happening in places, and science says this will continue.

My idea is to use this kind of argumentation for practical issues, as a way to avoid getting bogged down in abstractions. I will need to think of an example and then post.

A few days ago, I came across the argumentation theory of Toulmin, and it seems it might be useful...and much easier than formal logic. "Argumentation" here on the forum is all new to me (and for the record, I haven't put in very much study of formal logic).

Toulmin argumentation theory could have compatibility within Epicureanism. Also since we often need to come to a deeper application of Epicureanism based on Principle Doctrines and other writings, this might be a method of drawing conclusions in order to apply Epicureanism to modern life situations.

I am curious to know what others think of this?

Quote

Toulmin model of argument

This section is transcluded from Stephen Toulmin.

Toulmin argumentation can be diagrammed as a conclusion established, more or less, on the basis of a fact supported by a warrant (with backing), and a possible rebuttal.

Arguing that absolutism lacks practical value, Toulmin aimed to develop a different type of argument, called practical arguments (also known as substantial arguments). In contrast to absolutists' theoretical arguments, Toulmin's practical argument is intended to focus on the justificatory function of argumentation, as opposed to the inferential function of theoretical arguments. Whereas theoretical arguments make inferences based on a set of principles to arrive at a claim, practical arguments first find a claim of interest, and then provide justification for it. Toulmin believed that reasoning is less an activity of inference, involving the discovering of new ideas, and more a process of testing and sifting already existing ideas—an act achievable through the process of justification.

Toulmin believed that for a good argument to succeed, it needs to provide good justification for a claim. This, he believed, will ensure it stands up to criticism and earns a favourable verdict. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin proposed a layout containing six interrelated components for analyzing arguments:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_theory

And here is another good site:

Toulmin Argument // Purdue Writing Lab

The Purdue University Online Writing Lab serves writers from around the world and the Purdue University Writing Lab helps writers on Purdue's campus.

owl.purdue.edu

Quote from Matt

Cannibalism is usually considered pretty taboo…today anyway! And is often considered by “most” people to be “wrong” or “evil.”

Quote from Matt

Obviously nature directs us not to partake in this activity on any regular basis (humans anyway, animals are another story) but it does sometimes drive people to do things they would otherwise never consider doing. Yet still…will society still judge the act as evil? Though nature directs our behavior and is entirely neutral to the action, it ultimately is the human laws and taboos that decree something is “evil” or “wrong” based then entirely on circumstances which we would need to dissect situation by situation to determine if something “unlawful” happened by societal standards.

The Epicurean philosophy is not to live by solely by nature's instincts but to use reason for the most pleasureable life:

Principle Doctrine 5:

"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."

If civilization ended and cannibalism became the only way to survive, I can imagine that an Epicurean would sacrifice themselves or give themselves up for another's food because at that point "the party is over" meaning that a joyful life wouldn't be possible anymore, and it would also be chosen since "death is nothing to us".

Eikadistes ...thank you for the amazing chart you made comparing Epicureanism,
Theravada, and Mahayana!!!

Also, it is interesting to read your Epicurean goal, and appears you are synthesising several of the Principal Doctrines...

Quote from Nate

A godlike state of pure pleasure, a disposition of imperturbable joy, free from physical pain and mental anguish. The practice of prudence will lead the wise person to the good life.

A further comment in regard to:

Quote from Cassius

But in these things, I fear, you will suspect you are learning impious rudiments of reason, and entering in a road of wickedness. So, far from this, reflect what sad flagitious deeds Religion has produced. By her inspired, the Grecian chiefs, the first of men, at Aulis, Diana’s altar shamefully defiled with Iphigenia’s blood;

A new definition of "evil":

Evil is not only the harmful or hurtful act itself, but the "unreasonable" justification of the harm or injury by those commiting the act, and/or the unreasonable justification by those who are in the same tribe and/or who believe they benefit from the act.

Regarding the fear that "non-Epicureans" will misperceive us, and will say to us:

Quote from Cassius

Those views you are talking about sound pretty underground to me and actually bordering on evil.

This idea is something that needs to be "unpacked"...the fear that others will see Epicureans as evil. And it means we have more work to do, since there is a clear moral understanding within Epicureanism, which is that causing harm to others will most often result in less pleasure for ourselves and for those we love, as well as much more pain in the long-term. And so we act according to ethical values just like everyone else, however the understanding of "why" and "how" is slightly different.

Christianity is the source of the modern twisted concept of "evil". Otherwise we would simply say "causing harm". Is there a thread comparing Epicureanism with Christianity?

Buddhists when feeling a sense of "unsatisfactoriness" in oneself might cultivate indifference toward it.

Where as Epicureans when feeling "unsatisfactoriness" might put more effort into cultivating friendship and sharing pleasant and pleasureable experiences with others.

Which has me wondering...how often were festivals, celebrations, shared meal gatherings, etc. part of an ancient Epicurean lifestyle?

Quote from Cassius

does life have a goal or highest good in Buddhism, and if so what is it ?

There could be several goals:

1) the goal is Buddhist practice/meditation of "letting go" and realizing "aimlessness, signlessness, and emptiness" as the path to "nirvana"

2) to become a "bodhisattva of compassion" to help others (a Buddhist teacher)

Quote from Don

I think I should prioritize reading On Anger then read Tsouna's book.

Don, when you have read that, I would be so curious to find out how it compares to modern psychology. Here is a website, has four parts, all very good:

https://www.apa.org/topics/anger/control

Quote from Godfrey

in my first couple of highlights she touched on the pleasure/absence of pain controversy, which got me thinking about some of the issues involved in that debate.

Godfrey, that sounds interesting and am curious to hear more about that.

This is just off the top of my head...Is anything incorrect, or is anything missing?

Quote from Matt

There is nothing “special” about Buddhist doctrine, Its “various” doctrines can 100% be understood by non-Buddhists who can easily analyze it…if a person believes this isn’t the case then most likely they are far more Buddhist than Epicurean.

I don't agree...Buddhism isn't just "doctrine" because it is also a daily practice and how you live your life..You can't just "think" your way to "enlightenment". Enlightenment is for this present life. What all Buddhist schools have in common is dealing with the problem of suffering and dissatisfaction that seem to be part of the human inner experience.

A friend texted these words to me recently:

"I think it’s safe to assume that most of us (meaning all humans) are not overly happy people in general. Life allows for some pleasures here and there…the basics, but real joys are sometimes few and far between. I personally often feel a level of somberness that comes with a litany of experiences."

For myself I at times feel not only somber, but mildly depressed at times. So then Buddhism seeks to deal with this problem. It is a combination of doctrine and practice.

I would really like to see a side-by-side comparison of Buddhism and Epicureanism which shows the differences of how each one deals with feelings of "somberness" and "mild depression" (the kind of sadness which arises due to loss, grief, disappointment, loneliness, lack of freedom, lack of control)...as well as stressful feelings of anxiety, agitation, fear, and anger.

Buddhist meditation helped me with anxiety...but I left Buddhism because it wasn't helping me deal with my feelings of sadness. In fact I think that it made my feelings of sadness worse.

Anybody who had done Buddhist meditation at an organized Buddhist group...I would ask for help on creating this comparison.

And anyone who feels they have good Epicurean practices for dealing with sadness...please help, thank you

In the second paragraph of chapter 1:

Quote

Quote
Thus did Theon give vent to the indignation which the words of Timocrates had worked up within him. Timocrates had been a disciple of the new school; but, quarreling with his master, had fled to the followers of Zeno; and to make the greater merit of his apostacy, and better to gain the hearts of his new friends, poured forth daily execrations on his former teacher, painting him and his disciples in the blackest colours of deformity; revealing, with a countenance distorted as with horror, and a voice hurried and suppressed as from the agonies of dreadful recollections, the secrets of those midnight orgies, where, in the midst of his pupils, the philosopher of Gargettium officiated as master of the cursed ceremonies of riot and impiety

Could this paragraph be partially based on Diogenes Laertius Book X?

About historical cultural context...wondering what life was like back in ancient Greece...

Here is an article on courtesans in ancient Greece,

"hetaira" which translated as "female companion":

https://theconversation.com/ph…e-mind-body-divide-168940

On homosexuality in ancient Greece:

Deviance, if you like | Guardian daily comment | guardian.co.uk

Regarding higher education in ancient Athens:

What Were the 5 Great Schools of Ancient Greek Philosophy?

Five great philosophical traditions originated in ancient Greece: the Platonist, the Aristotelian, the Stoic, the Epicurean, and the Skeptic.

www.thoughtco.com

Education in ancient Greece - Wikipedia

"Buddhism in America"...is very much eclectic. At the Zen Buddhist Temple I attended there were rituals which were "more" Japanese Zen than what most lineages in Japan practice, and so monks from Japan would occassionally come to the Temple to study and practice under the head priest to learn the forms.

When people asked questions about "rebirth" the head priest's answer was very much in line with what Joshua wrote. But yet the head priest never forced or required anyone to hold to any one belief of "rebirth", so that people often interpreted it with a modern twist. Also, in Zen Buddhism rituals are very important and are considered to be the gateway to enlightenment (which goes against the Theravada avoidance of the fetter of attachment to rites and rituals). So Buddhism isn't so cut and dry, even if that would make it easier to talk about, and as Matt appears to hope for.

And this should be a lesson here for Epicureanism: It is really difficult to make people conform to one view of something. Everyone will have their own unique understanding of various points within the doctrine, and even that understanding may evolve and change over time.

So for example: there are now the two "camps"...one who's goal is "tranquil pleasures" vs. the other's goal is "all pleasures which do not lead to greater pains" (and which is our school). This will continue to be an issue and so we probably need to "make peace with it"...reach across this divide and make a truce, because it will be up to each person to decide their goal and also which interpretations best suit their temperament.

And something similar may happen for people within Epicureanism as with Buddhism. (Many people try out multiple schools of Buddhism (Theravada, Zen, Tibetan) before they find the one that feels right to them. Although in Epicureanism right now we don't have the formal level of development, other than what is online, but to me there appears to be two "camps".

Of course we still need to be clear about exactly where we stand here in this forum.

@Cassius...looking forward to hearing what you think?

Another good article for people with mild depression:

Quote

The evidence is clear that social isolation increases a person's risk of depression and can make symptoms more severe and longer-lasting. Of course, when you are depressed, socializing is even more difficult. One solution is to join a group devoted to something for which you have a strong passion.

"For instance, volunteering for a favorite cause can keep you connected with others on a regular basis, plus you have the extra motivation to engage because of your personal interest," says Dr. Mehta. Another way is to join a team that plays a sport you like, such as golf, bowling, or tennis.

The no-drug approach to mild depression - Harvard Health

While antidepressants can relieve and control symptoms of mild or moderate depression, they are not the only option. Many nondrug options are available to help…

www.health.harvard.edu

Okay! So we need to add an option to "volunteer" here on the forum!

Maybe this: "Volunteer to host an Epicurean Zoom Party"...togas optional (but of course some form of clothing required).

Here is a really good article that everyone should read, on the importance of community and mental health, including tips on finding community:

Quote

Mental health heavily influences our quality of life. So it makes sense that mental health, just like physical health, needs to be taken care of and maintained. And one way that it can be maintained is through finding a sense of community.

Community can be defined in many ways, but when simplified down to its most important element, community is all about connection. Community is not just an entity or a group of people, it’s a feeling. It’s feeling connected to others, feeling accepted for who you are and feeling supported. Having connection can help us feel wanted and loved

The Importance of Community and Mental Health | NAMI: National Alliance on Mental Illness

Quote from Cassius

We don't have a FAQ entry on depression. Should we? If we can develop a good strong answer here we can create a FAQ entry and point it to this thread.

I searched online about depression, and the differences between mild depression and major depression. Found some science/medicine based sites...but it was so "depressing" to read, that I can hardly recommend.

Since Epicureans hold science as the favored way of seeing the world, then all we can do is point to modern science, which for moderate and severe levels of depression uses a combination of talk therapy and medication.

The following excerpt is from an article that covers three levels of depression: mild, moderate, and severe:

Quote

Despite the challenges in diagnosis, mild depression is the easiest to treat. Certain lifestyle changes can go a long way in boosting serotonin levels in the brain, which can help fight depressive symptoms.

Helpful lifestyle changes include:

• exercising daily
• adhering to a sleep schedule
• eating a balanced diet rich in fruits and vegetables
• practicing yoga or meditation
• doing activities that reduce stress, such as journaling, reading, or listening to music

Other treatments for mild depression include alternative remedies, such as St. John’s Wort and melatonin supplements. However, supplements can interfere with certain medications. Be sure to ask your doctor before taking any supplements for depression.

A class of antidepressants called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) may be used in some cases. However, these tend to be more effective in people with more severe forms of depression. Recurrent depression tends to respond better to lifestyle changes and forms of talk therapy, such as psychotherapy, than medication.

While medical treatment may not be needed, mild depression won’t necessarily go away on its own. In fact, when left alone, mild depression can progress to more severe forms.

https://www.healthline.com/health/depression/mild-depression

Display More