Posts by Kalosyni

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

Quote from Cassius

It is a certainty that Nature gives us nothing other than pleasure and pain as the ultimate foundation of all choice and decision making.
Since I am going to be here for only a short time, I want to experience as much pleasure, and as little pain, as possible.
I consider it to be a certainty that it takes effort to remain alive, and effort means pain, and so I am ready and willing to accept some amount of pain as the price for achieving pleasure.

I think this generally makes sense for me, but yet there are times where I feel physical discomforts and then it becomes a matter of surviving the pain/discomfort. Which brings up the idea that Epicureanism may work best for people with a strong and healthy physical constitution. Unless there is some allowance for the pleasure of release from pain, some people will be left out. Also, sometimes pain or the fear of pain is a greater motivator, and if we can endure a little bit of pain now, to make sure that we don't have greater pain in the future, then that makes sense.

After reading about Jefferson's beliefs (in the above article) I find that he make have somewhat of an eclectic take in his Epicurean perspectives.

Would be curious if any one else has thoughts around this?

https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/jeffersons-religious-beliefs

It is important here, that we all see that there are various views begin presented on this thread that are coming from individual opinions, some of which are not based on the deep study of Buddhism.

When it came to my Buddhist understanding, I began to feel that either something was lost in time or lost in translation, or the Hindu religious understanding crept back into Buddhism (and which stamped out Buddhism in India after a certain number of years).

In Buddhism there is the understanding of the present moment experience...of understanding the components of present moment experience...there are objects, and there are sensory organs, and there are the sensory experiences. And consciousness arises from these sensory experiences.

Because if you follow the logic, then actually Buddha was ending the idea of endless reincarnation. In fact, his idea may have been so far out there that very few people actually got it. Basically this: that conciousness depends on the body. This is what I got from studying the Pali Suttas, and reading between the lines so to speak...but basically taking the ideas of Buddha to their logical conclusions.

As for the emphasis on suffering, maybe that too got taken out of it's original teaching. Buddha says in the Pali Suttas..."I teach dukkha (suffering) and the end of dukkkha". And so it originally was a kind of "self-help" teaching. And Buddha tells the story of the raft...you use the raft to cross the river, but once you reach the other side you don't start carrying the raft around, you leave it behind.

So as I think about it, an entire religion formed around Buddha, but evolved way beyond what Buddha intended. (hmm...that happened in Christianity also).

But the main take away here is that Buddhism has as it's goal the removal of suffering.

And Epicureanism has as it's goal the experience of pleasure. So it is a very different orientation. And I am still learning.

Quote from Cassius

But do you FIRST understand WHY this path makes sense?

Someone who skips right to the "application" without understanding may be apt to give up when the going gets tough, or when, as Lucretius says, that person is confronted by the scary or intimidating tales of the religionists or idealists, who suggest that you are following the path of evil by not heeding their definition of "the good."

In short it's important to understand why and how Epicurus embraced pleasure as the good so that you won't be shaken from the course in the inevitable storms of life.

Yes, thank you Cassius! I will carry on with my Epicurean studies

Here is a texting conversation that I had with an Epicurean friend recently (edited for clarity):

Me:

I've been thinking about the complexity of friendship...

1) First you have to meet people and have a conversation (or text conversation).

2) Then you have to discover commonality/common interests.

3) Then you have to discover overlaping needs/goals (a need for a certain goal in friendship).

4) Then a common motivation to mutually engage with each other must arise, which also depends on both people having a certain amount of free time to devote to one another. People who are married in long-term relationships have much less need for friends and also much less time.

Friend's Reply:

I think what we are finding is that a friendship just doesn't happen spontaneously but is frequently the result of a shared "project" on which you are working with another person. There probably has to be a joint goal to keep it all together or else even friendship can be "pointless."

So I think that joint projects are probably the key to at least let a friendship get started at the beginning. Of course in male/female relationships there is the attraction part which can start things, but unless there is a joint project even that will fall apart.

Me:

I think the joint project idea is good...and it also depends on the needs of the people involved...and also the ways that they find pleasure within friendship.

Because if the conversation is -ONLY- about the project then it doesn't really lead to a deeper friendship.

Friend's Reply:

I agree, but it is difficult to assess what friendship really is. You obviously have enjoyment in dealing with a friend, but it isn't just contemplation [conversation?]

- there is action involved "doing things together" is probably the key.

And enjoyment and pleasure are not static. Not everyone can or will be our friend.

Friendship itself is not a goal. Epicurus is right, it is pleasure alone that is intrinsically good. And what can appear to be friendship can die if it does not remain enjoyable.

Me:

More about finding commonalities...it is about what we find enjoyable in friendships. And there is what we can give, but also what we want to get.
And I very much enjoy conversation, the kind that is mutually fullfulling...a back and forth conversation...about anything and everything...no-holds-barred.

But of course some topics I might not know enough about, so then you would have to seek out someone else on those topics (obviously)...and same for you, you might not know enough on certain topics so then I would have to seek out someone else on those other topics.

Friend's Reply:

I think this is where your sister and I would agree that there are personality types among people and that there are good matches and bad matches

Me:

Okay, so are you saying that a certain kind of disposition and attitude toward life makes for a better conversational partner?

Friend's Reply:

Sort of. I think I am saying that conversational styles may exist where some people may understand some people much better than others. And it's not just a matter of being considerate or inconsiderate.

Me:

Yes I do agree. I think it is both conversational style and also each individual has drives and goals which shape how they view the world.

****

Here is what I would add: That there is some kind of pull that we feel toward people that we find conversationally engaging and who also have a pleasant and enjoyable disposition. Over time a common history of shared experiences will build up and this will lead to a feeling of a long-term friendship bond. Yet it seems that there still needs to be a personal dedication to putting in the time and energy to maintain the friendship. In a busy world, that means people would need to prioritize friendship. Not only knowing that pleasure comes from friendship, but actively shaping one's life so that one has time for friendships. Also, when you do find a genuine friend with shared mutual understanding and shared mutual goals, it can be somewhat of a rare situation, and so it would be a very precious pleasure indeed.

Here is my understanding of Buddhism, based on my study and practice:

I think that for many people who go into the study and practice of Buddhism, they are unhappy and they hope to find an answer as to what to do to have a better life. So Buddhism looks at what is causing the suffering, the "dukkha", in life.

From the Pali Sutta, ancient text:

Quote

"Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are dukkha."

— SN 56.11

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sac…ca1/dukkha.html

And they say that the suffering is due to clinging to unrealistic expectations...and then they say why do people cling? ...because they crave, and why do they crave? ...because they have greed.

The unrealistic expectations are that they want to hold onto things, or that they wish to permenently possess the things that they want, but actually the nature of everything is impermenence, and there is nothing that can be held onto. And then when unpleasant things happen, the urge to resist them and the feeling of aversion or anger arises, but things like being subjected to unpleasant things, and old age, sickness, and death are all inevitable.

So through the disciplined practice of meditation, within Zen Buddhism, they practice "letting go"...and "choiceless awareness"..."not picking or choosing" and also come to "realize" the "true nature of everything" which is "emptiness". And they practice by simplifying one's life and cultivating and practicing Buddhist virtues...the Buddhist precepts and the paramitas (perfections)...

Zen paramitas:

Quote

The six are (1) generosity (dāna), (2) morality (śīla), (3) patience (kṣānti), (4) vigor (vīrya), (5) concentration (dhyāna), and (6) wisdom (prajñā).

Zen Buddhist Precepts:

Quote

The Three Refuges

• I take refuge in the Buddha (the source of the teaching)
• I take refuge in the Dharma (the Buddha’s teaching)
• I take refuge in the Sangha (those who practise the teaching)

The Three Pure Precepts

• Cease from evil. By refraining from that which causes confusion and suffering, the truth will shine of itself
• Do only good. Doing good arises naturally when we cease from evil
• Do good for others. To train in Zen is to devote one’s life to the good of all living things

The Ten Precepts

• Do not take life
• Do not steal
• Do not indulge in abusive or inappropriate sexuality
• Do not lie
• Do not abuse intoxicants
• Do not criticize others
• Do not boast of your attainments and belittle others
• Do not be mean [stingy] in giving Dharma (teaching) or wealth
• Do not harbour anger
• Do not defame the three treasures (do not deny the Buddha within yourself or in others)

https://zenways.org/take-the-zen-precepts/

And for Buddhist "emptiness" there are different ways of explaining this...there is no inner and no outer, there is no center and no edge. All things are empty of intrinsic existence and nature. As for nhilism...this can come from the teaching of "no self" which is the understanding that there is no fixed innate "inner self" because the self arises dependent on many causes and conditions which are in flux.

I think that this understanding of the "no self" can lead to problems. It can lead to a quiet acquiescence in which a person engages with the world in a very passive way. This may work in the communal life of a Zen monastery, but doesn't translate well for the modern Western lifestyle. And then this could lead to a sense of "giving up" on life, for people who are introverted and lack social skills and lack adequate social connections.

So to answer a question that Cassius asked in the very first post...Yes, I think Buddhism leads people to cultivate passivity.

The understanding of pleasure in Buddhism is that it should not be "relied upon", because it is impermenent and ephemeral and therefore it will always lead to more suffering, because try as you might you just can't "hold onto" pleasure.

So.....now to contrast Buddhism with Epicureanism....

The antidote to all the unhealthy passivity of Buddhism....is Epicureanism!

For me....first it is important to understand what the natural and necessary pleasures of life are...and getting clear on what those are...then diligently (and patiently) working toward getting those pleasures. This is my list:

1) eating healthy food

2) an adequate place to live

3) good sleep

4) some form of regular exercise

5) making and maintaining good friendships (could include a life partner)

6) study of Epicurean wisdom philosophy

7) right type of career/job/craft

And...also there is the experience of pleasureable sensations and pleasureable memories, and yet the basics of one's life is a priority and is also the place where the all the sensory enjoyments arise.

Also...there is the anticipation that the basic pleasures will always be there to enjoy. For example, there is ample food to eat and so the pleasure of eating will continually occur every day. There is no need to over-eat, because in a few hours I will be hungry again and can enjoy eating all over again...which also means that there is a way to interact with food so as to bring the most pleasure...eat in a beautiful way...slowly/enjoyably and with pleasureable respect for the food.

In light of the Epicurean goal of a pleasurable life...here are some further ideas about romantic relationships, since a well functioning intimate relationship leads to more enjoyment in life. Here is an interesting article about the importance of common interests in long-term relationships. And so putting in time toward cultivating fun shared activities would be a good investment toward the well-being of a relationship.

Quote

...couples that have similar interests to a similar degree tend to have healthier relationships. These partners show interest in one another, think alike, share passion, enjoy similar adventures, and in the end, bond. These couples fight less because they generally agree on how to invest their energy and finances. Life is better in so many ways for couples who share interests.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/magnet…n-relationships

The Importance of Shared Interests in Relationships

One way to get and remain close to your partner.

www.psychologytoday.com

More tips...Here is a small-talk method called 'FORD'.

Small talk is good for conversations at parties, or meeting new people in new situations, with the goal to make people feel more comfortable. From these kinds of questions, you can begin to see what kinds of things you have in common, which might lead to a friendship. Tip: keep it light and easy, and take turns asking and answering, so that it is a back-and-forth conversation.

F - Family:

"Where are you from originally?"

"Where did you grow up?"

"Do you still have family there?"

"Do you have any brothers or sisters?" or "Did you come from a big or small family?"

If applicable: "How did you meet your _______?"(husband/wife/partner).

If applicable: "Do you have kids? How old are you children?"

"Do you have pets?" "What is your dogs name?" "How old is your dog?"

O - Occupation

"What keeps you busy these days?" (this is a good way to ask, in case they are unemployed).

After they answer then: "Oh, that's interesting, how did you get involved with that?" (or How did you get started with that? How did you get involved with that company?)

How long have you been in your field?

What's the best part of your job?

(or if in school, What's the best part of school? Your favorite course/subject?)

R - Recreation (interests and hobbies) (Make sure you don't take over the conversation... Remember you are looking for similarities).

"What do you do for fun?"

"Do you play any sports?"

"Have you seen any good movies lately?"

"Do you have any hobbies?"

"How did you become interested in that?"

"What do you like to do on weekends?"

"Have you heard the new song by ______?"

"Do you have a favorite restaurant that you like to go to?"

D - Dreams (goals) -- (Smile, listen, learn) (What gets them up in the morning) (motivation and goals, short-term dreams, long-term dreams)

"Any plans for the summer?"

"Have you traveled before?" or "Is this your first trip?

"If you could travel any where in the world where would you go?"

(Ask about what they want to see and do)

If they are working on a project (or taking a course) - "How did you get interested in that?" "What will you do once you finish this project?" (or course)

(If they just finished reading a book) "What did you like about the book?" "What do you want to read next?"

(Source:

I looked over the outline...

...and now I must apologize...I have not yet read much of this, and now realize that I must read it first, before I participate.

Quote from Cassius

Doing a chapter by chapter review of AFDIA would allow for a format in which we open the meeting with maybe a 15 minute recap of the events of a chapter (so as to provide continuity) and then go around the "table" letting each participant introduce themselves and say just a minute or two about that chapter. We could then use the balance of time for open discussion and then adjourn (probably after no more than an hour).

I was actually thinking to read it as a group, meaning that we would take turns reading. Then we could have very specific questions to guide the discussion (prepared ahead of time).

This is a good presentation, although at the end he brings up the idea of "intrinsic value" (and I would hope to find some reference to the writings of Epicurus).

Sadler on Epicurean friendship:

Quote from Don

Approaching life with a calm, tranquil mind makes us much better equipped to make choices and rejections for what will lead to a pleasurable life. A calm and tranquil mind is a base of operations from which to encounter the "slings and arrows" of our daily existence. It's not living numb in the world. It's like a lens through which to clearly encounter and evaluate what needs to be done. If our minds are disturbed, troubled, turbulent, it's like driving through our lives with a dirty windshield in a snowstorm. There is nothing wrong or improper about trying to have a tranquil mind. I think it can allow us to experience life more fully, more pleasurably. That's my summary take on this tranquility discussion.

Thank you Don, this is very important in my opinion. I think that what causes a problem is the meaning of the words "tranquil" and "tranquility" because these imply that when one is tranquil, there is nothing going on in the mind. It might be better to say a "smooth and clear running mind"...so maybe the word "equanimity"...not out of some kind of forced stoic ideal...but because of throughly understanding the materiality of the world (and thus not fearing death) and utilizing the guidance of prudence toward the Epicurean aim of enjoyment and pleasure.

Quote from Don

Epicurus specifically took a stand against the Cyrenaics that what they called the neutral place between pleasure and pain, that tranquil balance was a pleasure.

So in renaming the "neutral" as being a pleasureable tranquility...I would agree, but caution against putting too much on this, as this mind state only naturally occurs in very short intervals. Only if engaging in intentional meditation discipline can one extend this state of "neutral tranquility". But there are so many other things to do with one's mind, and instead of aiming for "neutral tranquility" as a remedy to stress, I would say pleasure is a much better way to deal with stress...so using healthy (and prudent) pleasures as medicine for stress...such as going for a walk or taking a relaxing bath. There is also a simple practice of "enjoying your breath" (mindful breathing) and when practiced correctly it is not a "neutral tranquility" but actually a blissful feeling moves inside the body as one attends to all the pleasureable sensations of breathing.

Post

RE: Meditation and Epicurean Philosophy (?)

I'll go ahead and do a description of a simple breath awareness meditation.

You begin as you say to yourself: "Breathing in, I know I am breathing in. Breathing out, I know I am breathing out." This can be your starting thoughts, then you can drop this and move to watching the sensations as they arise in the body...

Focus your awareness on air moving in through the nose (with mouth closed). Notice the feeling of the air as it flows inside the nostrils. Notice the feeling as your chest expands and…

Kalosyni

January 10, 2022 at 12:23 AM

Quote from smoothiekiwi

When I interact with people, there's a disturbance- different opinions and worldviews collide and influence one another.

You wrote this in reference to tranquility. So just the act of conversing with people can bring the opposite of tranquility. And I think it depends on the situation, and we have choices that we can make to either move toward something (move toward what feels good) or to move away from something (move away from what feels painful).

When I went to visit my parents last year. One of my sisters was also visiting my parent's house at the same time. She sometimes has a very nervous high-strung way of speaking, and views events and the world as negative, focusing on problems. I was feeling tremendous emotional distress, and the opposite of tranquil. After she left and I was still at my parents house, things were much quieter and relaxed, but I still felt untranquil. My parents also have some conversational quirks that make things "less than wonderful". So knowing this about my family, I don't expect anything different, and I visit once a year out of my own need to maintain the family bond...out of my own added material "security" (since there isn't very much emotional "security")...it gives me an added feeling of security in my life, but that requires that I also give a certain amount of attention and consideration to my parents, even though I am not "friends" with my parents. (As for my sister, we talk on the phone at a minimum, and I do so out of compassion). So we don't choose our family, but with friends we can make choices, and we can choose to surround ourselves with people who are happy and supportive, and don't cause us emotional distress.

So with friends...as the highest aim is pleasure...we can ask this of every social situation: "How can I make this more pleasureable?" Then let your mind open up to creative ideas for making things feel good. That will include making a request... to invite the other person (or persons) to join in your new idea. That could be as simple as "I apologize, but could we change the topic to something more easy-going? Like, let's talk about where we want to go to get lunch (or x,y,z, etc...to put the focus on enjoyment of life).

The hard part is when you have a friend that has a very strong worldview in support of the supernatural or some other very different worldview, and then you might choose to no longer meet up with that person.

So finding friends who have a common worldview will create more joy and ease.

Sharing a common worldview could be an important compatibility factor in maintaining a happy romantic relationship. This might explain why some couples divorce after the children are grown and move out of the house.

Now thinking...if one person holds an "Epicurean" worldview and the other does not, the relationship could still function but might not be as deep or connected. The drives and choices one makes come from one's worldview. Also, both short-term and long-term goals come out of one's worldview. In a long-term relationship the couple needs to jointly create either a shared or an overlapping worldview, with at least one ongoing shared activity.

A couple could define a shared worldview (and could have more than one of the following):

"Let's have an intellectually meaningful life" (studying; learning)

"Let's have a spiritually centered life" (personal-growth; religion)

"Let's have a family centered life" (time with children, families of origin, extended family)

"Let's help the world" (volunteer work; teaching)

"Let's change the world" (politics)

"Let's have a beautiful life" (aesthetic enjoyment; generating and spending wealth)

"Let's have a fun life" --- (doing activities which are enjoyable; socializing; traveling)

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

I would say that the Epicurean worldview is a mix of "fun and meaningful".

Some of the above ideas in the list are from an online article...I added in quite a bit of my own ideas...and this list might still need more added).
Source: https://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/a4175…r-is-worldview/

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

The deeper importance of all this is to consider your "worldview" compatiblity before you enter a long-term relationship.

If you are already married, you can work toward creating an overlapping worldview with common shared goals and shared activities.

This also means that if you are very enthusiastic about Epicureanism, how is your partner going to respond to that? How might you include your partner? How might you forgive/respect your partner if it seems that there is no way to include them in your enthusiasm for Epicureanism. (tip: make sure you have another area in your life that you are both equally enthusiastic about). This is all common sense, but presenting these ideas just in case, hope they are helpful.

Some of the topics that came up in tonights Zoom meeting...I am not a very good note taker, and there was so much good stuff that came up...and there was a lot more than this:

-Epicurean physics: why does it matter?

---it is part of an alternate theory of where the world came from - a worldview not created by supernatural gods/god.

-Can you know anything or not, confidence in your conclusions

-when it is appropriate to take a position on the things you can't ever know

-senses don't lie, but your understanding can (?)

-the problem of civilization, seeking wealth as the road to pleasure, Wall of Diogenes of Oenoanda.

-Platonic absolutes, some absolute standard to conform to...but Epicurus says no...grounded on feelings and senses, and in the understanding of the way things are.

Thank you everyone, and especially Cassius, for your helpful comments.

I don't think I would be enjoying my study of Epicureanism without everyone's help here on this forum. So this is an example of how community is helpful.

I think that atheists would probably be the most receptive people to talk to about Epicureanism, because there are so many similarities. In the atheist meetup that I went to pre-covid, I can't think of even one of the attendees who would actually believe in an afterlife. As for unexamined Platonic ideas (perhaps the "left-over" remains of a Christian upbringing) I can imagine if that was an issue, they would be very open to examining that. The main difficulty would be to convey: "pleasure as the highest good".

I would say tranquility is in the service of pleasure, so tranquility is under the umbrella of pleasure. So that also means that for those who really enjoy tranquility, then we must see that they desire it for the sake of pleasure. But those who enjoy tranquility, shouldn't make judgements against those modern Epicureans who enjoy motion, movement, sensations, and the liveliness of an "extroverted" lifestyle.

And of course, even friendship is in the service of pleasure.

I've been contemplating why it is that I feel that the Epicurean worldview is so important to me. In the study of Epicureanism, I have found many helpful ideas for how I want to make sense out of my life, and also how to determine what I want more of in my life (and less of) in my life. And yet, I am still in the process of formulating my own personal understanding of what is an "Epicurean worldview".

My childhood experience of growing up in Christianity and going to church shaped my mind and how I see the world. As a young child and young teen, I was fully absorbed into the church and religous beliefs, due to the intense programs that children were placed in. But by age 16, I began questioning my religious understanding of God, and by the age of 17, I could no longer believe in God. After moving out of my parents house, I began the journey of overcoming that strict Christian worldview that I was raised in. Going to college helped a bit, and also along the way I met people who greatly helped to expand my views and challenged me to think outside of "black and white" and "either / or" thinking.

After a number of years of studying all world religions and psychology/self-help, I entered into sole study and practice of Buddhism (for about 10 years). I studied on my own for a time, but then attended several different groups. I then went deeply into Zen Buddhist practice at a Zen temple, but then found it to be unsatisfying for a number of reasons.

So now coming to the study of Epicureanism just this last year (2020), and acknowledging that I have a bit of a "religious" drive within myself, and that I have a drive to find meaning in a complete worldview. I see Epicureanism as having a worldview in which I can organize my thoughts and my desires. On encountering this philosophy, I already had within me the "seeds" of this kind of thinking, so basically the draw for me is that this philosophy already resonates for me. I am not changing myself to fit into anything, much of how I think is already "Epicurean".

Coming from my past experience in Christianity and Buddhism, I see that surrounding oneself with others who have the same worldview can create a feeling of safety, security, and belonging. I acknowledge that I do feel a desire to surround myself with people who share my worldview of Epicureanism, but this is made a bit more difficult by the fact that there are so few Epicureans. The only answer to this is to create a way to share Epicureanism with others, and to build Epicurean community.

Also, when it comes to an internal sense of personal identity, perhaps that is something unique for every person, and the desire or "feeling of need" is at various levels, whether one feels secure or insecure in relation to other people. And this personal identity can affect what one wants from other people, such as the drive for emotional sharing or emotional closeness, or the drive for belonging and recognition...the desire to see and be seen, and to understand and be understood.

Others here on the forum may feel fine living independently in an Epicurean worldview, and not feel a desire to be surrounded by a community, and I can accept that. But for myself, I feel a great desire to create something, and how and what that will be is still unfolding. I want to call forward the creation of whatever is the most pleasureable and joyful community. And so I want to send out this to see what others think with regard to the Epicurean worldview and creating community?

I will attend Tuesday night Zoom. Topic of personal outlines...and other topics...

And have the following questions to discuss then...or if anyone else wants respond to the following questions, please respond in this thread if you can't attend the Zoom:

--what are best topics for a Zoom/in-person Epicurean study group...what topics might draw people to attend?

--to create an agenda or to not create an agenda?

--alternative times for meetings?

I found this and wanted to cross reference...as it brings up some interesting ideas:

Post

Friendship as Supported by the Canon, Physics, and Ethics

I have had a private and enjoyable conversation with a member about Epicurean friendship, and I think it has been a while since we specifically discussed friendship here. The member had a question about how "agape", an ancient Greek term for love which has been used for a sort of general charity and well-wishing by Christians, might be able to blend with our philosophy.

Here is a good example of how, by sticking to the original 3 part philosophic structure of Canon, Physics, and Ethics, and by…

Elayne

August 21, 2019 at 7:15 PM

Quote

In the above linked thread, Elayne writes:

PD 39 and VS 28, remind us that because we are using reality-based processes, not idealistic concepts, we will not have anything to do with virtues that treat all humans the same. We will not use abstract consequentialism. We must use our observations and feelings to find out who is a friend to us and who is not.

And so now, some further pragmatic advice...we need to reach out and make "bids" for connection. Just researching this idea on the internet...I found this excellent article, and the advice is for everyone, regardless of gender. This is such a good article, so please read the whole thing, if you feel so inclined.

Quote

But as far as getting that cycle going, “it does take some push from someone,” she says. “I think a lot of people, myself included, can sometimes get stuck. Like ‘They haven’t called me, so I’m not going to call them.’ If you want to talk to your friend just call them. You don’t have to play chicken about who’s going to take the first step.”

Rawlins, however, doesn’t care for the bid concept. “I don’t think of friendships in economic terms,” he says. “I don’t think about ‘investing’ in friends. I see friendship as an ongoing conversation. A way of literally coauthoring the story of our relationship.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive…-closer/538092/

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/08/how-friends-become-closer/538092/